Discussion structure scientific paper

Discussion structure scientific paper

10/1/ · Typical stages in the discussion: summarizing the results, discussing whether results are expected or unexpected, comparing these results to previous work, interpreting and explaining the results (often by comparison to a theory or model), and hypothesizing about their blogger.com: John Sisson results in a better paper. 1 The Standard Structure of a Scientific Paper The vast majority of papers published in scientific journals today follow a fairly simple structure. With some variations, most papers use an “IMRaD” format: 1. Introduction 2. Method (experiment, theory, design, model) 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions In the natural sciences, the Abstract, Introduction, Material and methods, Results and Discussion (AIMRaD) structure has been used in scientific papers. Some variations in this structure can be found in journals such as Nature and Plant Physiology, in which the Material and methods (or Methods) section is included in the final part of the paper (AIRDaM).Cited by: 1

How to Write a Strong Discussion in Scientific Manuscripts

Release Date: May 3, Category: Manuscript Writing Author: Rita N. A strong Discussion section provides a great deal of analytical depth.

Your goal should be to critically analyze and interpret the findings of your study. You should place your findings in the context of published literature and describe how your study moves the field forward. It is often easy to organize the key elements of a Discussion section into distinct paragraphs or groups of paragraphs. In summary, a strong Discussion includes a concise summary of the problem you are investigating and a critical discussion of major and minor findings in the context of published literature.

The limitations should also be acknowledged, and future directions should be discussed, discussion structure scientific paper. A strong ending is important; discuss the significance, overall conclusion, and major impact of your study. If you like our articles, try our workshops! Our articles are based on the material from our scientific writing workshops, which cover these and many other topics more thoroughly, with more examples and discussion.

We offer on-site workshops for your event or organization, and also host workshops that individual participants can attend. Our on-site scientific writing workshops can range from hours to several days in length.

We can tailor the length to suit your needs, and we can deliver a writing workshop as a stand-alone activity or as part of scheduled meetings. Our scientific writing workshops consistently receive high praise from participants including graduate students, post-docs, and faculty in diverse fields. Please see our scientific writing workshop page for details. If you found this article helpful or if there is a topic you want us to address in a future article, discussion structure scientific paper, please use our online comment submission formor contact us directly.

Your comments and suggestions are valuable! Click here to return to our scientific editing article library. Site Map My Account Home About Contact Prices Services. How to Write a Strong Discussion in Scientific Manuscripts Release Date: May 3, Category: Manuscript Writing Author: Rita N.

Summarize the major gap in understanding that your work is attempting to fill. What was the overarching hypothesis? In the first few sentences of the Discussion, state the main problem that you were trying to address. Although this should relate to the information that you provided in the Introduction, this paragraph should not repeat statements that have already been made.

Why is filling this gap important? How will answering this question move the field forward? After identifying the problem, state the main reason that this study was needed. Describe how answering this specific research question will make a significant contribution to your field.

Example: EGFR-overexpressing cancers are highly aggressive and have a higher tendency to metastasize. Currently, available drugs specifically target the EGFR and elicit high response rates. However, the majority of patients eventually develop progressive disease. The mechanisms through which cancers escape EGFR-targeted therapies remain unclear. Identification of specific molecules that mediate resistance to EGFR-directed treatments will facilitate the development of novel therapies and may improve responses to currently available therapies.

Paragraph 2: This paragraph provides a critical analysis of your major finding s. What was your overall approach for studying the gap? In one or two sentences, state the main models or strategies that you used to study this specific research question.

This should recapitulate whether the work included animals, cell culture, human subjects, or other novel techniques. Some investigators prefer to place this section at the end of the first paragraph. This decision may vary depending on the specific study, discussion structure scientific paper. What was the most important result of your study? The focus of this paragraph is to highlight the most important contribution that your study has made.

Explicitly state this result. Additional findings major and minor can be described in subsequent paragraphs. Do not repeat detailed results that can be found in the Results section. In general, specific figure numbers do not need to be re-stated in the Discussion unless you feel that doing so would substantially enhance your argument or discussion point.

A schematic of your proposed mechanism or model can often be helpful for clearly and concisely summarizing your major result s. How does your result s fit with existing literature? This is an important part of the paragraph and may require multiple paragraphs depending on the number of key studies that exist on your topic. This paragraph should be well-rounded, meaning that contrary reports must also be discussed. In the case of a contrary report, you should state your discussion structure scientific paper of how discussion structure scientific paper why the results of the two studies differed.

For example, did the approaches differ or were there major differences in sample sizes that may have affected results? Depending on how much information is available in the literature, a critical analysis of your major finding may require multiple paragraphs, discussion structure scientific paper. In the following example, we state the approach bold and the main result underline.

Example: In this study, we measured secreted factors in the media of sensitive and resistant cell lines to identify differentially expressed cytokines that may mediate resistance.

Through a combination of ELISAs and mass spectrometry-based assays, discussion structure scientific paper, we identified cytokine A as being significantly up-regulated in resistant cells, discussion structure scientific paper. Cytokine A is a major activator of the ABCD signaling cascade literature citations. The ABCD cascade is a known target of EGFR signaling and is usually blocked in response to EGFR inhibition literature citations.

A previous study demonstrated that exogenous stimulation of ABCD signaling reduces the response to EGFR-targeted drugs literature citations. This report is consistent with our finding that a major stimulus discussion structure scientific paper ABCD signaling is overexpressed in resistant cells.

Based on these data, we propose that hyperactive ABCD signaling is a major mechanism of resistance to EGFR-targeted therapies Figure XX, schematic of proposed mechanism of resistance. This section will discussion structure scientific paper greatly expanded in a real Discussion section to place your finding in the context of multiple published studies.

Paragraph 3: Discuss additional findings and how these fit with existing literature. Most studies yield multiple results. After you discuss your main result in the paragraph above, discuss additional major or minor findings. Unexpected and intriguing findings may be especially important to convey to readers, discussion structure scientific paper.

In addition, if a finding is contrary to what has been suggested discussion structure scientific paper the literature, acknowledge this, and offer explanations based on your study. Even if a result was not statistically significant, it can be helpful to discussion structure scientific paper a potential trend that may be important to assess in a future study, discussion structure scientific paper.

If these additional findings relate to your main finding, discuss the associations, discussion structure scientific paper. Paragraph 4: Discuss the limitations of the study. Discuss potential limitations in study design. For example, how representative was your model? Did sample size affect your conclusions? Consider how these limitations affect the interpretation or quality of data, discussion structure scientific paper.

Do they affect the ability to generalize your findings? Paragraph 5: Discuss future directions. What major follow up studies are indicated based on your results? Most studies yield new discoveries that prompt additional studies. Consider what new directions are supported by your findings. For example, do your experiments suggest that a specific molecule should be tested as discussion structure scientific paper new drug target or that tissue-based studies or clinical investigations should be performed to translate your animal studies to patients?

Making recommendations for follow-up studies is an important part of a Discussion. Paragraph 6: Discuss your overall conclusion and the major impact of your study. What is the main take-home message of your study? What is the main contribution that your study makes discussion structure scientific paper your field? Relate this discussion structure scientific paper to the first paragraph of the Discussion, discussion structure scientific paper.

Scientific Writing Workshops If you like our articles, try our workshops! Editing Services Abstracts Book Chapters Grant Proposals Marketing Materials Medical Editing Product and Package Labels Presentations Scientific Editing Other Services Book Indexing Clinical Writing Figure, discussion structure scientific paper, Table, and Model Services Grant Consulting Grant Reviews Journal Cover Letters Journal Formatting Journal Recommendation Journal Submission Language Translation Overlapping Text Detection Publisher Copyediting Medical Writing Online Science Writing Courses Regulatory Compliance Writing Workshops Take Action Ask a Question Forgot My Password Forgot My User ID Frequently Asked Questions Order Editing Online Register for Online Course Send Us Your Feedback © CopyrightBioScience Writers LLC, All Rights Reserved We are Anti Spam.

Korea University, "This is a great course for foreigners who do not use English as a mother tongue" Graduate Student South Korea. Country -- All Countries -- Australia Austria Bahamas Belgium Brazil Canada Chile China Colombia Congo Denmark France Germany Guatemala Hong Kong India Indonesia Iraq Israel Italy Japan Kuwait Lebanon Malaysia Mexico Netherlands Poland Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Korea Spain Sweden Switzerland Taiwan Thailand Turkey United States.

Editing Services Abstracts Book Chapters Grant Proposals Marketing Materials Medical Editing Product and Package Labels Presentations Scientific Editing. Other Services Book Indexing Clinical Writing Figure, discussion structure scientific paper, Table, and Model Services Grant Consulting Grant Reviews Journal Cover Letters Journal Formatting Journal Recommendation Journal Submission Language Translation Overlapping Text Detection Publisher Copyediting Medical Writing Online Science Writing Courses Regulatory Compliance Writing Workshops.

Take Action Ask a Question Forgot My Password Forgot My User ID Frequently Asked Questions Order Editing Online Register for Online Course Send Us Your Feedback.

Writing the Introduction and Discussion Sections for Social Science and Humanities Papers

, time: 1:17:33

How to Write a Discussion Section | Checklist and Examples

In the natural sciences, the Abstract, Introduction, Material and methods, Results and Discussion (AIMRaD) structure has been used in scientific papers. Some variations in this structure can be found in journals such as Nature and Plant Physiology, in which the Material and methods (or Methods) section is included in the final part of the paper (AIRDaM).Cited by: 1 results in a better paper. 1 The Standard Structure of a Scientific Paper The vast majority of papers published in scientific journals today follow a fairly simple structure. With some variations, most papers use an “IMRaD” format: 1. Introduction 2. Method (experiment, theory, design, model) 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 1/28/ · The discussion will always connect to the introduction by way of the research questions or hypotheses you posed and the literature you reviewed, but it does not simply repeat or rearrange the introduction; the discussion should always explain how your study has moved the reader's understanding of the research problem forward from where you left them at the end of the blogger.com: Zach Claybaugh