10 F is io te ra p ie , F e b r u a r ie 19 86 , d e e l 4 2 n o 1 Presenting Research in a Scientific Article Jo. M . B A R N E S A B S T R A C T C rite ria are set o u t th a t referees can use to ju d g e m a n u s c rip ts offered fo r p u b lic a tio n . O n e o f th e c rite ria is c la rity o f th e w ritin g an d so u n d n ess o f th e o rg a n isa ­ tio n o f th e article. T h is p a p e r deals m ain ly w ith this re q u ire m e n t o f g o o d w ritin g an d logical o rg a n isa tio n an d sets o u t th e b ro a d s tru c tu r e o f a scientific article u n d e r th e v a rio u s h ead in g s u su ally e n c o u n te re d in research p u b licatio n s. H in ts are given to help th e a u th o r to o rg a n ise th e m ass o f in f o rm a tio n in to a logical an d re a d a b le fo rm , w hile k eep in g th e re q u ire m e n ts o f elec­ tro n ic se arch in g o f lite ra tu re in d a ta b a se s in m ind. IN T R O D U C T IO N C o n c e rn h as b een voiced in m an y q u a rte rs a b o u t th e in creasin g n u m b e r o f p o o rly w ritte n scientific articles a p p e a rin g in b io m ed ical jo u rn a ls . T h ere are m a n y reaso n s fo r this d isq u ietin g situ a tio n . T h e fre q u e n tly invoked “p u b lish o r p e ris h ” sy n d ro m e ce rta in ly so m etim es resu lts in p re m a tu re p u b lic a tio n o f ill-conceived re se a rc h in p o o rly w ritte n articles, b u t c a n n o t be b la m e d fo r all o f it. P a r t o f th e p ro b le m also rests w ith scientists, w ho are n o t well ac q u a in te d w ith all th e im p lic a tio n s o f research m e th o d o lo g y , statistical an aly sis an d p r e s e n ta tio n o f re s e a rc h in scien tific articles. T h is a rticle is aim ed a t p ro v id in g in fo rm a tio n a b o u t th e o rg a n is a tio n o f o rig in a l re se a rc h o r clinical m a te ria l in a scientific article. C R I T E R IA F O R J U D G IN G M A N U S C R I P T S Before tu r n in g to th e s tru c tu re o f the scientific article a n d how to o rg an ise th e in fo rm a tio n in it clearly and logically, it m ay be w o rth w h ile lo o k in g a t th e c rite ria referees are re c o m m e n d e d to use w hen ju d g in g th e m erits o f m a n u sc rip ts to be p ublished. In S o u th A frica, like an y c o u n try w ith a relatively sm all re s e a rc h c o m m u n ity , th e a u th o r s a n d th e p o o l o f possible referees o f scientific p a p e rs c o n sist to a large e x te n t o f th e sam e people. F ro m th is it follow s th a t, sh o u ld th e w ritin g ex p ertise in any p a rtic u la r research field be lack in g , th e refereeing p ro cess will be sub- o p tim a l as w ell, since th e sam e in ex p erien ced a u th o rs are called u p o n to ju d g e th e p a p e rs o f th e ir fellow scientists. T his is a n o th e r reaso n w hy sta n d a rd s o f pub lish ed research are d ro p p in g . J o M . Barnes, Institute fo r M edical L iterature, Medical Research Council F o rm a l c rite r ia fo r ju d g in g m a n u s c rip ts su b m itte d fo r p u b lic a tio n c a n guide experienced a n d in experienced referees alike. T hese c rite ria m ay help in ex p erien ced referees by m a k in g th e m aw are o f v a rio u s asp ects to lo o k o u t fo r in m a n u sc rip ts, an d can serve as a checklist fo r e x p erien ced referees to av o id om issio n s. E specially referees w ho ju d g e m a n u s c rip ts fo r a v a rie ty o f jo u r n a ls w ith d iffe re n t re q u ire m e n ts m ay w elcom e a set o f sug- gested c rite r ia fro m th e e d ito r. Id e a lly th ese c rite ria sh o u ld in c lu d e :1 • th e im p o rta M e o f th e re se a rc h q u e s tio n o r subject- field stu d ied , • o rig in ality o f th e w o rk , • a p p ro p r ia te n e s s o f th e a p p ro a c h o r e x p e rim e n ta l design, • ad e q u a c y o f th e e x p e rim e n ta l tech n iq u es, • so u n d n ess o f th e co n clu sio n s an d in te rp re ta tio n , • relevance o f th e discussion, • c la rity o f th e w ritin g a n d so u n d n e ss o f th e o rg a n is a ­ tio n o f th e p ap er. T his article will be co n c e rn e d m ain ly w ith th e last- m e n tio n e d c rite rio n . O rg a n isin g th e c o n te n t o f a scien­ tific article can p re s e n t p ro b le m s even to experienced a u th o rs . N o tw o scientific articles ev er p o se id en tical p ro b le m s to th e a u th o r a n d it is n o t p o ssib le to lay d o w n rigid an d u n a lte ra b le ru le s by w h ich to p resen t th e in fo rm a tio n . N ev erth eless, o v e r th e p a s t th re e cen ­ tu rie s o f p u b lish e d science a b ro a d s tru c tu r e h as deve­ lo p ed fo r d isse m in a tin g b io m e d ic a l re se a rc h fin d in g s to fellow scientists th a t re p re se n ts th e m o s t logical and stre a m lin e d o rd e r o f in f o rm a tio n f o r th e reader. T he | m ain c o n s id e ra tio n in w ritin g u p research findings is th e logical u n d e rs ta n d in g o f th e re a d e r a n d n o t ease o f w ritin g fo r the a u th o r. S T Y L E O F A S C IE N T IF I C A R T IC L E A scientific a rticle is n o t a lite ra ry w o rk a n d d o es n o t follow th e sam e style. C la rity is essential. T h e c o n te n t o f a scientific artic le is c o m p le x an d th e te rm in o lo g y s o p h istic a te d . T h e re fo re , keep sen ten ces as s h o r t as possible w ith o u t re s o rtin g to a teleg rap h ic style. A void th e passive voice an d rem o v e all u n n ecessary ja r g o n or re p e titio n o f th e sam e c o n c e p t (ta u to lo g y ). It w astes s p ace a n d irrita te s th e re a d e r. L o n g , m e a n d e rin g sen­ ten ce s o b sc u rin g th e m e a n in g o r c o m p lic a tin g the read in g ta s k are p a rtic u la rly d e trim e n ta l to the objective o f a s c ie n tific -a rtic le , n am ely th e c a rry in g o v er o f carefu lly w eighed in fo rm a tio n . R ep ro du ce d by S ab in et G at ew ay u nd er li ce nc e gr an te d by th e P ub lis he r (d at ed 2 01 3. ) p h y s io th e ra p y , F e b ru a ry 1 9 8 6 , v o l 4 2 n o 1 11 S E Q U E N C E O F IN F O R M A T IO N T h e p re s e n ta tio n o f scientific re se a rc h in a n article is largely a q u e stio n o f o rg a n isa tio n . E ach article sh o u ld , in th e rig h t sequence, c o n ta in sections usually called In tro d u c tio n , M a te ria ls a n d M e th o d s, R esults, D is­ c u ss io n (C o n c lu s io n s), a n d R eferen ces. A n y o th e r sequence will p resen t p ro b le m s to th e re a d e r. In essence all these p a rts o r sections a re alw ays p re s e n t in a good article, b u t n o t all articles lend them selves to th e specific w o rd in g o f th e ab o v e -m e n tio n e d h ead in g s. T h e titles of these sectio n s c a n be a d a p te d to su it th e in d iv id u a l study. T hese sectio n s sh o u ld nev er be o m itte d th o u g h — it is inco n ceiv ab le th a t research c a n be rep o rted w ith o u t a d e s c rip tio n of, f o r in s ta n c e , th e m e th o d s and th e results. In the fo llo w in g discu ssio n th e v a rio u s h ead in g s used in scientific articles will be d e a lt w ith in the o rd e r th a t they a p p e a r in th e fin al m a n u s c rip t. T his is n o t the o rd e r in w h ich these in d iv id u a l pieces are w ritte n by th e a u th o r , th o u g h . F o r in s ta n c e , th e fin al title an d the a b stra c t a p p e a r a t th e to p o f th e article, b u t it sh o u ld be d ra w n u p la s t o f all — a fte r th e m a n u s c rip t is w ritten in its en tirety . C O N S T R U C T IN G A T IT L E T h e title o f a scientific article is m o st im p o rta n t. T his is th e o n ly p a r t th o u s a n d s o f p eo p le will read w ith ce rta in ty a n d c a n d e te rm in e w h e th e r th e w hole article will be read. T itles s h o u ld be as s h o r t as p o ssib le, b u t yet so specific as to co n v ey th e c o n te n ts o f th e artic le a c c u ­ rately. T h ere is a d a n g e r, th o u g h , a tta c h e d to titles th a t are to o s h o rt. T h ese titles a re u su ally c o n stru c te d o f w ords th a t a re to o vag u e o r to o b ro a d in m eaning. “T h e a c tio n o f a n tib io tic s o n b a c te ria ” is to o vague. It is n o t th e title o f a p a p e r, b u t m o re likely to be th e title o f a b o o k o r series o f b o o k s. E a c h b ro a d , v ag u e te rm can be re p la c e d by, fo r e x a m p le , specific te rm s like “T h e a c tio n o f so m e a n tib a c te r ia l c o m p o u n d s on S ta p h y lo c o c c u s a u re u s”. T h a t c a n in som e cases still be to o v ague an d “ a c tio n ” c a n be describ ed fu r th e r (for exam ple “in h ib itio n o f g ro w th ”). T h e a n tib a c te ria l c o m ­ p o u n d s can be n a m e d o r th e b ro a d gen eric g ro u p s of drugs sta te d , if to o n u m e ro u s to m e n tio n all n am es. By e x p a n d in g th e title in th is w ay — s ta rtin g w ith a sh o rt b u t b ro a d sen ten ce an d e x p a n d in g each te rm — the sy n tax is n o t d is tu rb e d an d it is easy fo r a n in e x p e ri­ enced w rite r to place all th e term s in logical o rder. T h e title o f a n article is its label. I t is used to retrieve the article by m ean s o f c o m p u te rise d search es o r to cate g o rise th e a rticle a c c o rd in g to its c o n te n ts. In th e ex p a n sio n o f th e title tr y to u se th e key w ords u n d e r w hich y o u w o u ld search fo r su ch a n article. A void “c le v e r” titles o r titles try in g to c a tc h th e re a d e r’s a tte n tio n by jo u rn a lis tic tech n iq u es. R a th e r be p rosaic, b u t specific. F ew re a d e rs co m e acro ss articles by b row sing in th e lib ra ry these days. A rticles are b ro u g h t to th e a tte n tio n o f p o te n tia l re ad ers th ro u g h co m p u terised lite ra tu re search es o r a b stra c tin g services. By ch o o sin g a ta n ta lisin g b u t vagu e title like “ P h y sio ­ th e r a p y — th e ro a d a h e a d ” th e article m ay be filed in th e d a ta b ase n ev er to be retrie v ed ag a in . If e x tr a key w o rd s d escrib in g th e c o n te n ts m ore a c c u ra te ly are n o t allo cated to th e article, no search will tu r n u p an article u n d e r such a title. T H E L IS T O F A U T H O R S T h is is a n easy w ritin g ta s k , b u t a d ifficu lt decision. T h e re is n o o bjective “r ig h t” sequence o f listin g the a u th o rs . S o m e la b o ra to rie s a n d in s titu tio n s p lace the a u th o r s alp h a b e tic a lly . T his h as o b v io u s d raw b ack s. A safe ru le is to lo o k a t th e c o n tr ib u tio n s o f th e va rio u s a u th o r s to th e research an d to list th e m in th e o rd e r of im p o rta n c e o f th e ir c o n trib u tio n s. T h e influential C o u n ­ cil fo r B iology E d ito rs states in its latest Style M a n u a l:2 “ D o n o t list as an a u th o r a n y p e rs o n w ho has n o t p a rtic ip a te d c o n c e p tu a lly an d m aterially in p lan n in g , e x ecu tin g , o r a n aly z in g th e research . A n early decision a b o u t a u th o r s h ip m ay p re v e n t la te r m isu n d e rs ta n d in g a n d e m b a rra s s m e n t. T h e p ra c tic e o f in c lu d in g in the byline (a u th o r d esig n atio n ) th e nam e o f a p erso n w ho h as n o t a c tu a lly engaged in th e re p o rte d re se a rc h is c o n sid e re d b y m a n y scientists to be u n e th ic a l. O n e o f th e c h ief o ffen d ers in this p ractice is th e in s titu tio n a l s u p e r io r w ho insists t h a t his o r h e r n a m e a p p e a r in the byline o f every artic le p ro d u c e d in th e d e p a rtm e n t he o r she su p erv ises.” A void lo n g lists o f a u th o rs if at all reco n cilab le w ith k eeping y o u r jo b . T h e p ressu re o n scientists to p u b lish is n o d o u b t th e re a s o n fo r lo n g lists o f a u th o rs. O nly im p o rta n t o r sig n ifican t c o n trib u tio n s to th e in v estig a­ tio n ju s tifie s a u th o r s h ip . I t is n o t s o m e th in g used to re w a rd p eo p le w ith , o r a g estu re o f th a n k s . A ll c o n tr i­ b u to r s w ho d o n o t q u alify as a u th o rs m u s t be th a n k e d in th e A ck n o w led g em en ts. T H E A B S T R A C T T h e A b s tra c t is co m p iled a fte r th e re st o f th e m a n u ­ sc rip t is co m p le te d , b u t is u su ally p rin te d ju s t a fte r the list o f a u th o rs. T h e A b stra c t m u s t briefly an d succinctly describe th e m ain p o in ts o f th e article: 1. a s h o r t s ta te m e n t o f th e p ro b le m stu d ie d o r th e aim o f the in v estig atio n , 2. th e m e th o d s o f in v estig atio n an d statistical analysis, 3. th e p o p u la tio n o r subjects stu d ied , an d 4. th e m ain finding(s). T h e u su al len g th is 150-200 w ords, b u t follow the in s tru c tio n s of th e jo u r n a l. M a n y re a d e rs use th e A b s tr a c t to d e te rm in e w h eth er th e y w a n t to read th e article, to keep it fo r la te r use, o r to sk ip it. T h e A b s tra c t m u st c o n ta in th e in fo rm a tio n needed fo r th is decision. A b stra c tin g jo u r n a ls an d som e c o m p u te riz e d d a ta b ases ta k e o v er th e a b s tra c t as is fo r fu r th e r d isse m in a ­ tio n to scientists. It is im p o rta n t to keep in m ind th a t m o re peo p le will re a d th e A b s tra c t se p a ra te d fro m the re st o f th e article th a n to g e th e r w ith it. I t m u s t be able to be rea d a n d in te rp re te d o n its ow n. P lease n o te th a t th e A b stra c t is n o t the first p a ra g ra p h o f th e In tro d u c tio n . A b b re v ia tio n s and new ly created R ep ro du ce d by S ab in et G at ew ay u nd er li ce nc e gr an te d by th e P ub lis he r (d at ed 2 01 3. ) F is io te ra p ie , F e b r u a r ie 19 86 , d e e l 4 2 n o 1 EM S physiotherapy equipment from Medical Distributors (Pty) Ltd technology recovery T h e M e g a p u lse u n it is Ihe very latest d e v e lo p m e n t in p u ls e d e lectro m ag n etic^ th erap y . Like all EM S e q u ip m e n t th e M e g a p u lse is reliable a n d s u p e rb ly d e sig n e d a n d is back ed b y a n ex cellen t after sale s service D etailed in fo rm a tio n o n th e M e g a p u lse is av ailab le from th e a d d re s s b e lo w :— W o rld w id e re se a rc h h a s s h o w n th at in su itab le cases th is th e ra p y is e x tre m e ly b eneficial in s p e e d in g u p n a tu ra l h e alin g pro cesses. W ith th e M e g a p u lse th e th e ra p ist h as available a n in c re a se d ra n g e of p u lse w id th s a n d re p e a t ra te s a llo w in g a g re a te r c h o ic e of tre a tm e n ts th a n e v e r b efore. T h e M e g a p u lse can b e u s e d to in crease re c o v ery ra te s w h e n tre a tin g :— • In flam m atio n # T issu e re p a irs • A rterial U lcers # P re s su re so re s • V ascular, v e n o u s a n d o rth o p a e d ic c o n d itio n s M E D I C A L D I S T R I B U T O R S P O Box 3378 J o h a n n e s b u rg 2000 P O Box 195 C ape Tow n 8000 P O Box 5298 D urban 4000 P T Y LTD ED M S B P K Phone Phone Phone 29-0611 47-4440 37-1501 R ep ro du ce d by S ab in et G at ew ay u nd er li ce nc e gr an te d by th e P ub lis he r (d at ed 2 01 3. ) P h y sio th e rap y , F e b r u a r y 1986, v o l 4 2 n o 1 13 term s used in th e A b s tr a c t m u s t be re-d efin ed a t th e first m e n tio n in th e te x t. T h e sam e re m a rk goes fo r ab b rev iatio n s a n d new te rm s in th e title. THE IN T R O D U C T IO N T he aim s o f a g o o d in tro d u c tio n are: 1. to state th e n a tu re a n d e x te n t o f the p ro b le m investi­ gated clearly, 2. to o rie n ta te th e re a d e r by review ing the a p p ro p ria te literatu re, 3. to id en tify g ap s o r c o n tr a d ic tio n s in th e p re s e n t know ledge as it a p p e a rs fro m th e lite ra tu re , 4. to review p rev io u s m e th o d s o f in v estig atio n o r stu d y m o d els an d to ju s tify o r e x p la in th e o n e c h o se n by th e a u th o r fo r th e p re s e n t in v estig atio n , and 5. to sta te so m e k in d o f a h y p o th e s is, even a te n ta tiv e one, o n th e basis o f th e stu d y o f th e lite ra tu re an d w h at th e a u th o r is lo o k in g fo r in th e inv estig atio n . T h e d a y s o f a p u rely descrip tiv e stu d y u n d e rta k e n w ith n o s ta tis tic a l p la n n in g are in m o s t cases lo n g past. T hese ru les are w ell-k n o w n a n d n eed n o e la b o ra tio n . It is im p o rta n t to k eep the lite ra tu re review b rie f an d to the p o in t, b ecau se vague, w a n d e rin g a rg u m e n ts here will leave th e re a d e r u n im p ressed w ith b rillia n t co n c lu ­ sions la te r. T h e in tro d u c to ry se n ten ce is n o to rio u sly difficult to w rite a n d a bit o f im a g in a tio n can help to stim u late re a d e r in te re st. O n ly re s o rt to th e s ta n d a rd “ In 1979 S m ith an d W a ts o n fo u n d th a t . . .” if all else fails. W hy fire y o u r first s h o t u n d e r so m eo n e else’s flag? A m o re u sefu l w ay is to s t a r t w ith a sentence o rie n ta tin g th e r e a d e r as to th e b ro a d to p ic th e article is g o in g to d eal w ith: “ In sp ite o f th e a v a ila b ility o f effective d ru g s since 1970, th e m o rta lity d u e to . . . disease is still u n a c c e p ta b ly h ig h in so m e r u r a l a re a s o f the c o u n tr y ,” o r “ P a tie n ts ’ views o n sickness an d u n d e r­ sta n d in g o f tr e a tm e n t have an im p o rta n t in flu en ce on th e ir co m p lian ce w ith a d ru g re g im e n .” H ig h ly specialised co n c e p ts an d o rig in a l c re a tio n s and system s o f a n n o ta t io n c a n also be e x p la in e d in th e in tro d u c tio n . T h e In tro d u c tio n m u s t fo rm a c o m p le te u n it — a w hole — an d m u s t h av e a n u n b r o k e n line o f a rg u m e n t ru n n in g th r o u g h it. It m u s t have a “sto ry lin e” an d sh o u ld n o t ju s t be a c o lle c tio n o f ju m b le d facts an d cited p ap ers. P u b lish e d w o rk sh o u ld only be cited to su p p o rt o r m a k e a p o in t in th e line o f a rg u m e n t. T hey m u st nev er be cited ju s t b e cau se th ey d eal ro u g h ly w ith th e sam e su b ject o r to m a k e th e re a d in g list lo o k im pressive. T h e cited w o rk m u s t have d irect b e a rin g o n th e p r e s e n t stu d y. Be ca re fu l n o t to ju s tify th e e x p e rim e n ta l design or p ossible choices o f e x p e rim e n ta l m e th o d s in th e D is­ cussion. S u c h ju s tific a tio n s are u su ally m o re su ited to th e In tr o d u c tio n , since th e re a d e r sh o u ld ta k e n o te o f th em befo re s ta rtin g on th e M a te ria ls an d M e th o d s. M A T E R IA L S A N D M E T H O D S C o m p lete d e ta ils o f th e e x p e rim e n t a re given here. “ C o m p le te ” is u su ally ta k e n to m ean as m a n y d e ta ils as a c o m p e te n t re s e a rc h e r in th e field needs to r e p e a t th e e x p e rim e n t. T o this I w o u ld like to add th a t details e sse n tia l to th e in te r p r e ta tio n o f th e resu lts m u s t be m e n tio n e d even th o u g h th e e x p e rim e n t m ay h av e been fully e x p la in e d in a p rev io u s p u b lic a tio n . E n o u g h d e ta il o f p rev io u sly p u b lish e d m e th o d s m u s t be given so th a t th e re a d e r will hav e a t le a st a su p erficial kn o w led g e o f th e m e th o d s e m p lo y e d a n d th e s a m p le stu d ied in o rd e r to read f u r th e r w ith o u t re tu rn in g to th e lib ra ry . T he a m o u n t o f d e ta il will d e p e n d on a v a ila b le sp ace, how w ell-k n o w n th e m e th o d s are, an d th e e d ito ria l policy o f th e jo u r n a l. R a th e r give to o m a n y d etails th a n to o few — th e e d ito r will ta k e o u t su p e rflu o u s s ta te m e n ts and will never penalise th e m a n u s c rip t b ecause o f them . It is e ssen tial to give a a b rie f o u tlin e o r “ p la n ” o f th e e x p e rim e n t e a rly o n in th is se c tio n to o rie n ta te th e re a d e r an d to p ro v id e an overview o f th e e x p e rim e n ta l desig n so th a t all th e d e ta ils can be fitted in to the b r o a d e r w hole. M a n y e x p e rie n c e d re s e a rc h e rs will n o t read th is sec­ tio n unleiss th e m e th o d s u sed d ev iate fro m g enerally accepted pro ced u res. H ow ever, th ey will alm o st certainly s c ru tin ise th is s e c tio n if s o m e th in g h in d e rs th e m in th e resu lts. A u th o rs c a n n o t a ffo rd th e loss o f cred ib ility th a t o ccu rs w h en referees o r read ers find a m istak e in th e M a te ria ls a n d M e th o d s se c tio n . T a k e critical care t h a t th is s e c tio n is c o rre c t an d co m p lete. S h o u ld a referee feel th a t th e e x p e rim e n ts are u n re p e a ta b le fro m th e in f o r m a tio n given o r c a n n o t be in te rp re te d b ecause o f o b v io u s g a p s, n o a m o u n t o f b re a th ta k in g resu lts will sto p him fro m tu r n in g th e p a p e r dow n. S u b h e a d in g s c a n help th e re a d e r to g ro u p to g e th e r d etails m ean in g fu lly . T ry to use th e sam e p a tte rn o f su b h e a d in g s in th e D iscu ssio n . A void th e c o m m o n m ista k e o f slip p in g in som e o f th e resu lts here. R E S U L T S T h is se c tio n is a really s ig n ific a n t p a r t o f th e m a n u ­ s c rip t. It is th e p r o o f a ro u n d w hich th e a rg u m e n ts are b u ilt. U su ally n o t all resu lts a re m e n tio n e d in w o rd s, only th e s ig n ific a n t o r o u ts ta n d in g o nes. T h e m o s t c o m p a c t fo rm to give th e b u lk o f th e d a ta is b y m e a n s o f tab les. D o n o t p re s e n t th e sam e resu lts in tw o d ifferen t w ays (i.e. ta b u la r a n d g rap h ic). R e m e m b e r in th e c h o ic e o f ta b le s o r g ra p h s as o p p o se d to w o rd s, th a t th e first tw o are m o re expensive to ty p eset th a n te x t, b u t w h en selected w ith ca re , tab les an d g ra p h s can rep resen t d a ta in c o m p a c t fo rm . G ra p h s are id eally su ited to sh o w tr e n d s o r p ro files an d can c o n tr a s t a larg e n u m b e r o f d a ta p o in ts w ith ea c h o th er. G ra p h s give a g o o d o v e ra ll p ic tu re a t a glance, b u t a c c u ra te v a lu e s c a n u su a lly n o t be o b ta in e d fro m th e p u b lish ed v ersio n . T h re e to fo u r lines are th e m o s t th a t sh o u ld be used in a g ra p h ; o th e rw ise c o n fu s io n results because o f reduced size. W h ere a c tu a l values are needed to c o m p a re tw o sets o f d a ta , tab les are b etter. T h e title o f a ta b le m u s t be se lf-e x p la n a to ry an d the ta b le o n its o w n m u s t m a k e sense. A ta b le gives in f o r­ R ep ro du ce d by S ab in et G at ew ay u nd er li ce nc e gr an te d by th e P ub lis he r (d at ed 2 01 3. ) 14 F is io te ra p ie , F e b ru a rie 19 86 , d e e l 4 2 n o 1 m a tio n so th a t th e te x t can be s h o rte r. It is n o t a n em b e llish m e n t a n d m u s t serve a p u rp o s e to convey essen tial in f o rm a tio n . All tab les m u st be referred to in th e text. D a ta c a n be re p re se n te d h o riz o n ta lly o r vertically in a tab le. H o w ev er, “c a n ” does n o t m ean “s h o u ld ”. O rg a ­ nise d a ta (as a g e n e ra l ru le) so th a t elem en ts read “d o w n ” a n d n o t “ a c ro s s”. T h e in d e p e n d e n t v ariables a re u su ally given re a d in g “d o w n ”, i.e. in co lu m n s (as o p p o se d to row s). R o ta te a tab le by 90° in an y case o f d o u b t a n d see if y o u d o n o t g ain in clarity a n d space. F o llo w th e jo u r n a l in stru c tio n s carefully in th e p re p a ­ ra tio n o f ta b le s a n d g ra p h s , as w ell as o th e r m a te ria l such as sketches a n d p h o to g ra p h s. W hen th e m an u scrip t is p re s e n te d to a jo u r n a l, th is care ta k e n can alread y give th e m a n u s c rip t a slig h t edge o v er o th e r c o n te n d e rs fo r th e av ailab le space. D IS C U S S IO N T h is is o n e o f th e m o s t d ifficu lt sectio n s to w rite an d th e o n e s e c tio n w h ere m a n y m a n u s c rip ts sta n d o r fall. E ven th o u g h th e d a ta is valid a n d in terestin g , the m a n u s c rip t will be rejected if th e D isc u ssio n d is to rts o r o b scu res th e resu lts. R e m e m b e r th a t th e o n u s o f p ro o f rests w ith th e a u th o r. I t is a so u rc e o f b o th m irth a n d sad n ess a m o n g e d ito rs th a t even th e m o st stran g e o r in c o rre c t results c a n be e x p la in e d aw ay b lith ely by som e ingenious a u th o r s . P lease be ca re fu l (a n d co n serv ativ e!), fo r y o u r o w n r e p u ta tio n ’s sake, w h en faced w ith stran g e o r d e v ia n t results. T h e D isc u s sio n c a n u su ally be d iv id ed in to th ree c o m p o n e n ts w hich are in terw o v en to fo rm a sm all essay: 1. In te rp re ta tio n o f th e results given in th e previous sectio n . T h is fo rm s th e m a in p a r t o f th e D iscu ssio n . H o w c a n th e resu lts be ex p lain ed ? R em e m b e r to be fa c tu a l a n d n o t to d ra g in c irc u m sta n tia l evidence. S u p p o rtin g lite ra tu re c a n be q u o te d if needed. R efer to th e p re v io u s sectio n (R esu lts) as w ell as th e p o in ts em e rg in g fro m th e ta b le s a n d g ra p h s. M o s t im p o rta n t: re la te h o w all th is fits in w ith th e h y p o ­ thesis sta te d in th e In tro d u c tio n . S om e a u th o r s are te m p te d to discuss results w hich d o n o t d iffe r sig n ifican tly fro m th e c o n tro l values o r fro m e a c h o th e r b ecau se th e d a ta sh o w ed som e “te n d e n c ie s” to w a rd s d ifferin g (e.g. alw ays slightly m o re p o sitiv e). T h ese a u th o r s so m etim es p ro v id e d etailed e x p la n a tio n s fo r these su p p o se d differences as if th e y w ere really ob serv ed . “T e n d e n c ie s” can only serve as a g u id elin e to red esig n in g th e e x p e ri­ m e n t fo r h ig h e r accu racy o r fo r a n o th e r a p p ro a c h to th e p ro b le m in o rd e r to o b ta in th e req u ired degree o f sensitivity to test these su p p o sed differences sta tis­ tically. 2. A d v a n c e s in k n o w le d g e . H o w d o th e findings fit in to th e fra m e w o rk o f ex istin g know ledge? W h a t are th e im p licatio n s o f these findings fo r o th e r disciplines o r su b je c t areas? H o w d o th e findings affect existing p ractices? H ere claim s o f o th e rs (w ith references) c an be discussed an d differences o f o p in io n c a n be reconciled. 3. F u tu re so lu tio n s. O p in io n s c o n cern in g th eo ry , fu tu re so lu tio n s, etc. c a n be d iscussed. D u rin g th e co u rse o f th e e x p e rim e n t m an y v a lu a b le lessons w ere le a rn t a b o u t c e rta in m eth o d s, m an o eu v res o r ex p erim en ts th a t d id n o t w o rk . In f o rm a tio n o n th ese p ro b lem s a n d h ow th e y w ere o v ercom e sh o u ld also be sh ared w ith the re se a rc h c o m m u n ity . T his c a n stim u late a n o th e r research er to d o fu r th e r research. R em em b er to keep th is sh o rt. A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S T h is sm all se c tio n is a c tu a lly very im p o rta n t. T ech ­ n ic a l a n d fin a n c ia l aid m u s t alw ays be acknow ledged w ith th a n k s . T o th a n k a s e n io r w ho h a d little to do w ith th e w o rk in o rd e r to im p ress is u n w o rth y , because fla tte ry c o rru p ts th e giver as well as th e receiver. R E F E R E N C E S O n ly cited references m ay a p p e a r in th e reference list. U n p u b lis h e d d a ta , su m m a rie s, etc. s h o u ld n o t be ta k e n u p in th e reference list, b u t sh o u ld be cited as p e rs o n a l co m m e n ts in th e te x t. T his is u su ally done b e tw e e n b ra c k e ts in th e te x t, b u t som e jo u r n a ls use fo o tn o te s fo r th is p u rp o s e . M a k e sure w hen com m ents fr o m p e rs o n a l le tte rs, c o n v e rs a tio n s, etc., are cited th a t th e p erm ission o f th e a u th o r /s p e a k e r is o b ta in e d before­ h a n d . S o m e jo u r n a ls in sist o n receiving p e rm issio n in w riting fro m th e o rig in a to rs .of these p erso n al com m ents befo re allow ing su ch citatio n s. T h e re are m a n y styles o f referen cin g in use. A sure w ay o f g e ttin g th e m a n u s c rip t sen t s tra ig h t b a c k is to ig n o re th e in s tru c tio n s to a u th o rs . T a k e g re a t care th a t th e references are as co rrect as h u m an ly possible. S hould a referee d isco v er som e serio u s flaw s h ere (especially th o s e sm ack in g o f d is h o n e sty o r p lag iarism ) it places a q u e s tio n m a rk o v er th e co rre c tn e ss o f th e w hole m a n u ­ script. T his is a ch an ce n o t w o rth tak in g . S P E C I A L N O T E A B O U T C A S E R E P O R T S N o te th a t th e case re p o rt is a special fo rm o f the scien tific artic le an d m a n y o f th e p o in ts n eed ed fo r an e x p e rim e n ta l stu d y fall aw ay. T h e basic stru c tu re o f a scientific article (A b stra c t, In tro d u c tio n , M a te ria ls and M e th o d s , R e s u lts , D is c u s s io n , R e fe re n c e s ) alw ays applies, alth o u g h in c o n tra c te d fo rm a n d n o t necessarily w ith fo r m a l h ead in g s. C ase re p o rts a re p u b lish e d in o rd e r to le a rn so m e th in g , o r fo r arc h iv a j p u rp o s e s to p reserv e in f o rm a tio n o n ra re o r in terestin g cases fo r la te r re fe rra l. T h e case r e p o r t will hav e a c o n sid e ra b ly b e tte r ch an ce o f a p p e a rin g in p rin t if, in th e D iscussion, so m e re a s o n fo r k n o w in g a b o u t th is case, o r som e im p o r ta n t p o in t illu s tra te d by it, c a n be given. M ere c u rio sity value is n o t en o u g h fo r a jo u r n a l w ith pressing space p roblem s. R ep ro du ce d by S ab in et G at ew ay u nd er li ce nc e gr an te d by th e P ub lis he r (d at ed 2 01 3. ) p h y s io th e ra p y , F e b r u a r y 1 9 8 6 , vo l 4 2 n o 1 15 TY P IN G A N D P R E S E N T A T IO N O F THE M A N U S C R IP T T h e re are c e rta in m in im u m p h y sical re q u ire m e n ts a m a n u s c rip t m u s t m eet. A b a d ly ty p e d m a n u s c rip t will in m o s t cases n o t even be c o n sid e re d by th e e d ito r. M a n u s c rip ts m u s t be ty p e d , n o t w ritte n , o n o n e side o f th e pag e a n d in k eep in g w ith th e style o f th e jo u r n a l. Use g e n e ro u s m a rg in s fo r n o te s by th e e d ito r an d fo r m a rk in g u p th e m a n u s c rip t fo r p rin tin g . S u p p ly th e re q u ire d n u m b e r o f re a d a b le copies w ith all p h o to ­ g ra p h s, ta b le s an d so o n a tta c h e d . B E F O R E T H E E N V E L O PE IS S E A L E D A sk a co lle a g u e to re a d th r o u g h th e w hole m a n u ­ s c rip t as w ell as th e a d d e n d a in o n e sittin g as a fin al c o n tro l. C a ta s tro p h e s c a n still be rectified a t th is stage. R e m e m b e r to p a c k m a n u s c rip ts firm ly an d to p ro te c t all p h o to g r a p h s , a rtw o r k etc. w ith e x tr a layers o r c a rd ­ b o a rd . D o n o t u n d e re s tim a te th e tr a u m a cau sed by th e p o s ta l services. K eep a n e x tr a co p y a n d in q u ire w hen receip t is n o t a ck n o w led g ed w ith in a re a s o n a b le tim e. D o n o t e x p e c t th e m a n u s c rip t to be accep ted w ith o u t a m u r m u r. S u g g ested im p ro v e m e n ts o r co m m en ts by th e referees are n o t m e a n t as a th re a t o r to b elittle. I t is th e re s e a rc h th a t c o u n ts , n o t the g a rm e n t in w h ich it w as clo th ed . If th e re q u ire d changes a re few, it pays to d o th em . I f ra d ic a l changes are suggested, sit b a c k and th in k ag ain . S o m e fu r th e r w o rk can be d o n e to p re s e n t a stro n g e r case, th e m a n u s c rip t can be re w ritte n , o r a d iffe re n t jo u r n a l ch o sen . R e m e m b e r th a t very few m a n u s c rip ts p re s e n te d to p o p u la r p restig io u s overseas jo u r n a ls are accep ted w ith o u t an y changes. A lth o u g h one keep s on learn in g a b o u t this in tricate jo b o f w ritin g u p scien tific resu lts, it is c o n so lin g to re m e m b e r th a t th e re is alw ays an o p p o rtu n ity to do b e tte r n e x t tim e! References 1. D eB akey L. Tfte scientific journal: Editorial policies and practices. S t 1