How to Read a Research Paper Book Review

J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2013 Jan-April; 17(1): 65–70.

Art of reading a journal article: Methodically and effectively

RV Subramanyam

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

Abstract

Background:

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

Objective:

To outline a logical and orderly arroyo to reading a scientific manuscript. Past breaking downward the task into smaller, footstep-past-pace components, one should be able to attain the skills to read a scientific article with ease.

Methods:

The reader should brainstorm by reading the championship, abstract and conclusions start. If a decision is made to read the entire article, the cardinal elements of the article can exist perused in a systematic mode effectively and efficiently. A denoting and organized method is presented to read articles published in scientific journals.

Determination:

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

Keywords: Articles, journal, reading, research, systematic

INTRODUCTION

"We are drowning in information merely starved for knowledge."

John Naisbitt

It has become essential for the clinicians, researchers, and students to read articles from scientific journals. This is non just to keep abreast of progress in the speciality concerned but as well to exist enlightened of electric current trends in providing optimum healthcare to the patients. Reading scientific literature is a must for students interested in enquiry, for choosing their topics and conveying out their experiments. Scientific literature in that field will assistance one understand what has already been discovered and what questions remain unanswered and thus help in designing one's enquiry project. Sackett (1981)[i] and Durbin (2009)[ii] suggested diverse reasons why most of united states read journal articles and some of these are listed in Table 1.

Table 1

Common reasons for reading journal manufactures

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

In spite of the internet quickly gaining a stiff foothold as a quick source of obtaining information, reading journal articles, whether from print or electronic media, withal remains the most mutual way of acquiring new data for most of u.s.a..[two] Paper reports or novels can be read in an insouciant manner, but reading enquiry reports and scientific articles requires concentration and meticulous arroyo. At present, there are 1312 dentistry journals listed in Pubmed.[v] How tin 1 choose an commodity, read it purposefully, effectively, and systematically? The aim of this article is to provide an reply to this question by presenting an efficient and methodical arroyo to a scientific manuscript. Withal, the reader is informed that this paper is mainly intended for the apprentice reader unaccustomed to scientific literature and not for the professional person interested in critical appraisal of journal articles.

TYPES OF JOURNAL Articles

Unlike types of papers are published in medical and dental journals. One should exist aware of each kind; specially, when one is looking for a specific blazon of an article. Table 2 gives unlike categories of papers published in journals.

Table 2

Types of manufactures published in a journal

In general, scientific literature tin be chief or secondary. Reports of original enquiry form the "main literature", the "core" of scientific publications. These are the articles written to present findings on new scientific discoveries or describe before work to acknowledge information technology and place 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.[6] An commodity published in a peer-reviewed journal is more valued than one which is non.

An original inquiry 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 Instance-command or Cohort study. Reviews could be not-systematic (narrative) or systematic. A narrative review is a broad 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 type of systematic review in which numeric results of several separate studies are statistically combined to make up one's mind the effect of a specific research question.[vii–nine] Some are invited reviews, requested by the Editor, from an skilful in a item field of study.

A case study is a report of a single clinical example, 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 procedure, imaging technique, diagnostic test, or handling 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 but has limited text. Commentary is a short article on an author's personal opinion of a specific topic and could exist controversial. An editorial, written by the editor of the periodical or invited, tin be perspective (about articles published in that particular effect) or persuasive (arguing a specific bespeak of view). Other manufactures published in a journal include letters to the editor, volume reviews, conference proceedings and abstracts, and abstracts from other journals.[ten]

WHAT TO READ IN A JOURNAL? – CHOOSING THE RIGHT Article

Not all enquiry articles published are excellent, and it is pragmatic to make up one's mind if the quality of the study warrants reading of the manuscript. The first step for a reader is to cull a right article for reading, depending on one'due south individual requirement. The side by side stride is to read the selected article methodically and efficiently.[2] A simple decision-making flowchart is depicted in [Effigy ane], which helps one to decide the type of article to select. This flowchart is meant for one who has a specific intent of choosing a particular blazon of article and not for one who intends to browse through a periodical.

Schematic flowchart of the starting time step in choosing an article to read

HOW TO Kickoff READING AN ARTICLE?

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

Clarence Solar day

At commencement glance, a periodical article might announced intimidating for some or confusing for others with its tables and graphs. Reading a research article tin can be a frustrating feel, specially for the one who has not mastered the art of reading scientific literature. But like there is a method to extract a tooth or prepare a cavity, one can besides larn to read research articles past post-obit a systematic approach. About scientific manufactures are organized as follows:[ii,eleven]

1. Championship: Topic and information about the authors.

2. Abstract: Brief overview of the article.

3. Introduction: Groundwork 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 estimation of the results and implications of the study.

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

Review articles exercise not usually follow the above pattern, unless they are systematic reviews or meta-analysis. The central rule is: Never start reading an commodity from the beginning to the finish. It is better to begin by identifying the conclusions of the report by reading the championship and the abstract.[12] If the article does not take an abstract, read the conclusions or the summary at the end of the article first. After reading the abstruse or conclusions, if the reader deems it is interesting or useful, so the entire commodity tin can be read [Figure two].

Determination-making flowchart to decide whether to read the chosen article or not

THE TITLE

Like the title of a pic which attracts a filmgoer, the title of the article is the one which attracts a reader in the first identify. A good title will inform the potential reader a swell deal near the study to decide whether to go ahead with the newspaper or dismiss it. Well-nigh readers prefer titles that are descriptive and self-explanatory without having to expect at the entire commodity to know what information technology is all about.[2] For example, the paper entitled "Microwave processing – A approval for pathologists" gives an idea about the commodity in general to the reader. Simply in that location is no indication in the title whether it is a review article on microwave processing or an original research. If the title had been "Comparison of Microwave with Conventional Tissue Processing on quality of histological sections", even the insouciant reader would take a better understanding of the content of the paper.

Abstract

Abstruse helps usa make up one's mind whether nosotros should read the unabridged article or not. In fact, most journals provide abstract gratuitous of toll online allowing us to decide whether we need to purchase the entire article. Most scientific journals now take a structured abstract with separate subheadings like introduction (groundwork or hypothesis), methods, results and conclusions making it easy for a reader to identify of import parts of the study quickly.[thirteen] Moreover, in that location is ordinarily a restriction near the number of words that tin exist included in an abstruse. This makes the abstract concise plenty for ane to read quickly.

The abstract tin be read in a systematic fashion past answering certain cardinal questions like what was the study about, why and how was the written report conducted, the results and their inferences. The reader should brand a notation of any questions that were raised while reading the abstract and be sure that answers accept been plant after reading the entire article.[12]

Reading the unabridged article

Once the reader has decided to read the unabridged article, i can begin with the introduction.

INTRODUCTION

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This section gives the technical details of how the experiments were carried out. In most of the enquiry articles, all details are rarely included merely in that location should be plenty data to understand how the study was carried out.[12] Information about the number of subjects included in the study and their categorization, sampling methods, the inclusion criteria (who can exist in) and exclusion criteria (who cannot exist in) and the variables called can be derived past reading this section. The reader should get acquainted with the procedures and equipment used for information collection and detect out whether they were appropriate.

RESULTS OF THE STUDY

In this department, the researchers give details about the data collected, either in the class of figures, tables and/or graphs. Ideally, interpretation of data should not be 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 (same results over time) and valid (measure what it is supposed to measure). An important aspect is to check if all the subjects present in the starting time of the study were accounted for at the terminate of the study. If the answer is no, the reader should check whether any caption was provided.

Results that were statistically significant and results that were not, must be identified. One should also observe whether a right statistical exam was employed for analysis and was the level of significance appropriate for the study. To capeesh the choice of a statistical test, one requires an understanding of the hypothesis being tested.[fourteen,15] Tabular array 3 provides a listing of unremarkably used statistical tests used in scientific publications. Clarification and estimation of these tests is beyond the scope of this paper. Information technology is wise to recollect the following communication: It is not only important to know whether a departure or association is statistically significant only as well appreciate whether information technology is large or substantial plenty to be useful clinically.[16] In other words, what is statistically pregnant may not exist clinically significant.

Table 3

Bones statistics commonly used in scientific publications

Word

This is the nearly important section of the article where the enquiry questions are answered and the meaning of assay and interpretation of the data are presented. Usually the study results are compared with other studies, explaining in what aspects they were dissimilar or like. Ideally, no new data should exist presented under discussion and no information from other sections should be repeated.[two] In improver, this section too discusses the various strengths and limitations/shortcomings of the study, providing suggestions about 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 section. It is important to think that the discussions are the authors' interpretations and opinions and non necessarily facts.

READING THE Determination (AGAIN !)

Though conclusion part had been read at the beginning, it is prudent to read it once more at the end to confirm whether what nosotros had inferred initially is correct. If the conclusion had not made sense earlier, information technology may brand sense after having perused through the entire article. Sometimes, the report 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 diverse sub-headings of an original research newspaper are presented every bit a simple questionnaire in Table 4. Information technology is causeless that one who is using this questionnaire has read and analyzed the abstruse and and then decided to read the entire article. 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 articles, writing answers to these questions and taking notes will assist in understanding nigh aspects of a inquiry article.

Table 4

Questionnaire for original research articles

CONCLUSION

"Let us read with method, and propose to ourselves an stop to which our studies may point. The utilize of reading is to aid u.s.a. in thinking."

Edward Gibbon

It has become mandatory to read scientific literature to be well-informed of ever-expanding information and/or for amend diagnosis, prognosis and therapy. Since there is an abundance of journals and manufactures, it is critical to develop a modus operandi for achieving a rapid, purposeful, effective and useful method to read these manuscripts. A simple just efficient and logical approach to scientific literature has been presented here for choosing articles and reading them systematically and effectively for a better agreement.

Footnotes

Source of Back up: Nil.

Conflict of Involvement: None alleged.

REFERENCES

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

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

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

6. Hersh West. Information Retrieval: A Health and Biomedical Perspective (Wellness Information science) 3rd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2009. p. 68. fourscore, 85. [Google Scholar]

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

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

10. Peh WC, Ng KH. Basic structure 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;9:70–ii. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

14. Hess DR. How to write an effective give-and-take. Respir Intendance. 2004;49:1238–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

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

16. Riegelman RK. Studying a Written report and Testing a Test: How to read the medical prove. 5th ed. Philadelphia, U.s.: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2005. p. 45. [Google Scholar]

hutchinstruces84.blogspot.com

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

Share this post