Listing the Name of an Article You Read

J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2013 Jan-April; 17(i): 65–seventy.

Fine art of reading a journal commodity: Methodically and effectively

RV Subramanyam

Department of Oral Pathology, Drs Sudha and Nageswara Rao Siddhartha Institute of Dental Sciences, Gannavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India

Abstruse

Background:

Reading scientific literature is mandatory for researchers and clinicians. With an overflow of medical and dental journals, it is essential to develop a method to cull and read the right articles.

Objective:

To outline a logical and orderly approach to reading a scientific manuscript. By breaking down the task into smaller, step-by-step components, one should be able to achieve the skills to read a scientific article with ease.

Methods:

The reader should begin past reading the title, abstract and conclusions first. If a decision is made to read the entire article, the fundamental elements of the article can exist perused in a systematic manner effectively and efficiently. A cogent and organized method is presented to read articles published in scientific journals.

Conclusion:

One tin can read and appreciate a scientific manuscript if a systematic approach is followed in a simple and logical manner.

Keywords: Manufactures, journal, reading, enquiry, systematic

INTRODUCTION

"We are drowning in data but starved for noesis."

John Naisbitt

Information technology has become essential for the clinicians, researchers, and students to read articles from scientific journals. This is not only to go on abreast of progress in the speciality concerned only also to be aware of electric current trends in providing optimum healthcare to the patients. Reading scientific literature is a must for students interested in research, for choosing their topics and carrying out their experiments. Scientific literature in that field will help one understand what has already been discovered and what questions remain unanswered and thus help in designing one'due south inquiry project. Sackett (1981)[1] and Durbin (2009)[two] suggested various reasons why about of us read journal manufactures and some of these are listed in Table one.

Tabular array ane

Common reasons for reading journal articles

The scientific literature is burgeoning at an exponential rate. Between 1978 and 1985, almost 272,344 manufactures were published annually and listed in Medline. Between 1986 and 1993, this number reached 344,303 manufactures per twelvemonth, and between 1994 and 2001, the figure has grown to 398,778 manufactures per year.[3] To be updated with current knowledge, a physician practicing general medicine has to read 17 articles a day, 365 days a year.[4]

In spite of the internet rapidly gaining a strong foothold as a quick source of obtaining data, reading journal articles, whether from print or electronic media, even so remains the almost mutual manner of acquiring new information for most of us.[two] Newspaper reports or novels can be read in an insouciant manner, but reading research reports and scientific articles requires concentration and meticulous arroyo. At present, in that location are 1312 dentistry journals listed in Pubmed.[five] How can i choose an article, read it purposefully, effectively, and systematically? The aim of this article is to provide an respond to this question by presenting an efficient and methodical approach to a scientific manuscript. All the same, the reader is informed that this paper is mainly intended for the amateur reader unaccustomed to scientific literature and not for the professional interested in critical appraisement of journal manufactures.

TYPES OF JOURNAL ARTICLES

Different types of papers are published in medical and dental journals. Ane should be aware of each kind; especially, when ane is looking for a specific type of an article. Table 2 gives different categories of papers published in journals.

Tabular array 2

Types of articles published in a journal

In general, scientific literature can exist primary or secondary. Reports of original enquiry form the "primary literature", the "core" of scientific publications. These are the manufactures written to present findings on new scientific discoveries or describe earlier piece of work to acknowledge it and identify new findings in the proper perspective. "Secondary literature" includes review articles, books, editorials, practice guidelines, and other forms of publication in which original research information is reviewed.[half-dozen] An article published in a peer-reviewed journal is more valued than one which is not.

An original research article should consist of the following headings: Structured abstract, introduction, methods, results, and word (IMRAD) and may exist Randomized Control Trial (RCT), Controlled Clinical Trial (CCT), Experiment, Survey, and Case-control or Cohort study. Reviews could be non-systematic (narrative) or systematic. A narrative review is a wide overview of a topic without any specific question, more or less an update, and qualitative summary. On the other hand, a systematic review typically addresses a specific question about a topic, details the methods past which papers were identified in the literature, uses predetermined criteria for selection of papers to be included in the review, and qualitatively evaluates them. A meta-analysis is a blazon of systematic review in which numeric results of several split up studies are statistically combined to determine the upshot of a specific inquiry question.[7–9] Some are invited reviews, requested by the Editor, from an adept in a particular field of study.

A case written report is a report of a single clinical case, whereas, a case series is a clarification of a number of such cases. Case reports and case series are description of disease (s) more often than not considered rare or report of heretofore unknown or unusual findings in a well-recognized condition, unique process, imaging technique, diagnostic test, or treatment method. Technical notes are description of new, innovative techniques, or modifications to existing procedures. A pictorial essay is a teaching article with images and legends simply has express text. Commentary is a short article on an author'southward personal opinion of a specific topic and could be controversial. An editorial, written by the editor of the periodical or invited, can be perspective (about articles published in that particular effect) or persuasive (arguing a specific point of view). Other articles published in a journal include letters to the editor, book reviews, conference proceedings and abstracts, and abstracts from other journals.[10]

WHAT TO READ IN A Periodical? – CHOOSING THE RIGHT ARTICLE

Not all research articles published are excellent, and it is pragmatic to decide if the quality of the study warrants reading of the manuscript. The outset pace for a reader is to choose a right article for reading, depending on one's private requirement. The next pace is to read the selected commodity methodically and efficiently.[2] A simple controlling flowchart is depicted in [Figure 1], which helps i to decide the type of article to select. This flowchart is meant for one who has a specific intent of choosing a particular type of article and not for one who intends to browse through a journal.

Schematic flowchart of the first footstep in choosing an article to read

HOW TO Showtime READING AN ARTICLE?

"There is an fine art of reading, as well as an art of thinking, and an art of writing."

Clarence Day

At outset glance, a periodical article might appear intimidating for some or confusing for others with its tables and graphs. Reading a inquiry article can be a frustrating feel, especially for the one who has not mastered the art of reading scientific literature. Only like there is a method to excerpt a tooth or prepare a cavity, one can also acquire to read research articles past post-obit a systematic approach. Most scientific articles are organized every bit follows:[two,11]

1. Title: Topic and information about the authors.

2. Abstract: Cursory overview of the article.

3. Introduction: Background information and argument of the research hypothesis.

4. Methods: Details of how the study was conducted, procedures followed, instruments used and variables measured.

5. Results: All the data of the study along with figures, tables and/or graphs.

6. Discussion: The interpretation of the results and implications of the study.

7. References/Bibliography: Citations of sources from where the information was obtained.

Review articles do non unremarkably follow the above pattern, unless they are systematic reviews or meta-analysis. The key dominion is: Never start reading an article from the get-go to the end. It is better to brainstorm by identifying the conclusions of the study past reading the championship and the abstruse.[12] If the commodity does not have an abstract, read the conclusions or the summary at the end of the article kickoff. Later on reading the abstract or conclusions, if the reader deems it is interesting or useful, then the unabridged article can be read [Figure 2].

Decision-making flowchart to make up one's mind whether to read the chosen article or not

THE TITLE

Like the title of a film which attracts a filmgoer, the title of the commodity is the i which attracts a reader in the first identify. A skillful title will inform the potential reader a great deal about the study to decide whether to go ahead with the newspaper or dismiss it. Most readers prefer titles that are descriptive and self-explanatory without having to look at the entire commodity to know what it is all about.[2] For example, the paper entitled "Microwave processing – A blessing for pathologists" gives an idea nigh the commodity in full general to the reader. But in that location is no indication in the title whether information technology is a review article on microwave processing or an original inquiry. If the title had been "Comparing of Microwave with Conventional Tissue Processing on quality of histological sections", even the insouciant reader would have a better understanding of the content of the paper.

ABSTRACT

Abstract helps us determine whether nosotros should read the entire article or not. In fact, most journals provide abstract free of cost online assuasive u.s.a. to decide whether we need to purchase the unabridged article. Most scientific journals at present have a structured abstract with dissever subheadings similar introduction (background or hypothesis), methods, results and conclusions making information technology piece of cake for a reader to identify of import parts of the report quickly.[thirteen] Moreover, there is usually a restriction almost the number of words that tin be included in an abstract. This makes the abstract concise enough for one to read rapidly.

The abstract can be read in a systematic way past answering certain fundamental questions like what was the study virtually, why and how was the study conducted, the results and their inferences. The reader should make a notation of any questions that were raised while reading the abstract and exist sure that answers take been found after reading the entire article.[12]

Reading the entire commodity

In one case the reader has decided to read the entire article, one can brainstorm with the introduction.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the introduction is to provide the rationale for conducting the written report. This department normally starts with existing knowledge and previous inquiry of the topic under consideration. Typically, this section concludes with identification of gaps in the literature and how these gaps stimulated the researcher to design a new written report.[12] A expert introduction should provide proper background for the study. The aims and objectives are usually mentioned at the end of the introduction. The reader should likewise determine whether a inquiry hypothesis (study hypothesis) was stated and later check whether it was answered nether the discussion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This section gives the technical details of how the experiments were carried out. In nigh of the research manufactures, all details are rarely included only there should exist enough information to empathise how the written report was carried out.[12] Data nigh the number of subjects included in the study and their categorization, sampling methods, the inclusion criteria (who can be in) and exclusion criteria (who cannot be in) and the variables chosen can exist derived past reading this section. The reader should get acquainted with the procedures and equipment used for data collection and find out whether they were appropriate.

RESULTS OF THE STUDY

In this department, the researchers give details virtually the data collected, either in the form of figures, tables and/or graphs. Ideally, interpretation of information should not exist reported in this section, though statistical analyses are presented. The reader should meticulously go through this segment of the manuscript and find out whether the results were reliable (aforementioned results over time) and valid (measure out what it is supposed to measure out). An important attribute is to check if all the subjects present in the beginning of the study were accounted for at the end of the study. If the answer is no, the reader should check whether any explanation was provided.

Results that were statistically significant and results that were not, must exist identified. 1 should also observe whether a right statistical test was employed for analysis and was the level of significance appropriate for the study. To appreciate the choice of a statistical exam, one requires an agreement of the hypothesis being tested.[14,xv] Table 3 provides a list of commonly used statistical tests used in scientific publications. Clarification and estimation of these tests is beyond the scope of this newspaper. It is wise to remember the following advice: Information technology is not only important to know whether a difference or association is statistically significant simply besides capeesh whether information technology is large or substantial enough to be useful clinically.[16] In other words, what is statistically meaning may not be clinically significant.

Table 3

Basic statistics commonly used in scientific publications

Word

This is the most important section of the article where the enquiry questions are answered and the pregnant of analysis and estimation of the data are presented. Usually the study results are compared with other studies, explaining in what aspects they were different or similar. Ideally, no new information should exist presented under discussion and no information from other sections should be repeated.[2] In addition, this department also discusses the diverse strengths and limitations/shortcomings of the report, providing suggestions virtually areas that demand additional research.

The meaning of results and their analyses, new theories or hypotheses, limitations of the report, explanation of differences and similarities with other comparable studies, and suggestions for future research are offered in this department. It is important to call back that the discussions are the authors' interpretations and opinions and not necessarily facts.

READING THE Determination (AGAIN !)

Though decision role had been read at the beginning, it is prudent to read information technology over again at the end to confirm whether what we had inferred initially is correct. If the determination had not made sense earlier, it may make sense after having perused through the entire article. Sometimes, the study conclusions are included in the discussion section and may not be like shooting fish in a barrel to locate. The questions that can be asked under various sub-headings of an original research paper are presented as a elementary questionnaire in Tabular array 4. Information technology is causeless that one who is using this questionnaire has read and analyzed the abstruse then decided to read the entire commodity. This questionnaire does not critically analyze a scientific commodity. However, answers to these questions provide a systematic approach to obtain a broad overview of the manuscript, especially to a novice. If one who is new to reading manufactures, writing answers to these questions and taking notes will assist in understanding about aspects of a inquiry commodity.

Tabular array four

Questionnaire for original research manufactures

CONCLUSION

"Let united states of america read with method, and propose to ourselves an terminate to which our studies may point. The use of reading is to help us in thinking."

Edward Gibbon

It has go mandatory to read scientific literature to be well-informed of always-expanding information and/or for better diagnosis, prognosis and therapy. Since there is an abundance of journals and articles, information technology is critical to develop a modus operandi for achieving a rapid, purposeful, effective and useful method to read these manuscripts. A unproblematic but efficient and logical approach to scientific literature has been presented here for choosing articles and reading them systematically and effectively for a ameliorate understanding.

Footnotes

Source of Support: Nil.

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

REFERENCES

1. How to read clinical journals: I. Why to read them and how to start reading them critically. Can Med Assoc J. 1981;124:555–8. [PMC costless article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

2. Durbin CG., Jr How to read a scientific inquiry paper. Respir Care. 2009;54:1366–71. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

three. Druss BG, Marcus SC. Growth and decentralization of the medical literature: Implications for prove-based medicine. J Med Libr Assoc. 2005;93:499–501. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

6. Hersh W. Information Retrieval: A Health and Biomedical Perspective (Health Information science) tertiary ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2009. p. 68. eighty, 85. [Google Scholar]

7. Callcut RA, Branson RD. How to read a review paper. Respir Intendance. 2009;54:1379–1385. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

eight. Greenhalgh T. Papers that summarise other papers (systematic reviews and meta-analyses) BMJ. 1997;315:672–5. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Peh WC, Ng KH. Bones construction and types of scientific papers. Singapore Med J. 2008;49:522–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Hudson-Barr D. How to read a research article. J Spec Pediatr Nurs. 2004;ix:seventy–two. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: Writing and editing for biomedical publication. [Last accessed on 2011 October 10]. Available from: http://world wide web.icmje.org/urm_main.html .

xiv. Hess DR. How to write an effective word. Respir Care. 2004;49:1238–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Das R, Das PN. Biomedical Enquiry Methodology including Biostatistical Applications. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publications (P) Ltd; 2011. pp. 123–45. [Google Scholar]

16. Riegelman RK. Studying a Study and Testing a Test: How to read the medical evidence. 5th ed. Philadelphia, USA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2005. p. 45. [Google Scholar]

masseywounieve1981.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3687192/