At a recent meeting of the Climacteric editors and subsequent meeting of the Editorial Board, we explored mechanisms by which authors requesting assistance could be provided help in developing their manuscripts. It was clear that, although some only required assistance with actual manuscript preparation, others would have benefited by early assistance with research/protocol development, as it is much more difficult (if not impossible) to prepare a quality manuscript if the underlying research has not been well designed and properly conducted.
Although additional papers could be written by those with expertise in the design and conduct of clinical research, as well as by those with experience in manuscript preparation, there is already an abundance of these in the literatureCitation1–13. Even though this is but a partial listing of the many references available, it provides substantial reading material for those seeking assistance. Additionally, there is a series of 12 one-page articles in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology (2013;66:397, 585, 702, 817, 945, 1064, 1197, 1198, 1319; and 2014;67:3, 123, 243) in the Writing Tips Series by D. Kotz and J.W.L. Cals.
Journal space is valuable and hence manuscripts need to be well organized, following journal guidelines, concise, clearly written, and the tables and figures carefully selected. Redundancy should be avoided. Generally speaking, the information provided should be new and of broad interest to the readers of the journal.
Attention should be paid to complying with proper study requirements. For clinical studies, these generally include Ethics Committee (Institutional Review Board) approval, informed consent and clinical trial registration where appropriate (ClinicalTrials.gov, for example). For laboratory studies, relevant laboratory health and safety procedures need be complied with as well as animal care committee approval obtained where applicable. Early consideration should have been given to the development of an appropriate study plan or protocol with proper methodology.
Of easily correctable problems, spelling and grammar rank high. When there is such a concern, manuscripts should be proof read by one or more people well versed in the English language prior to submission. Another common problem, but not easily correctable after the fact, is sample size determination. Manuscripts, from inadequately powered studies or those in which it has not been defined, may have limited value especially where authors indicate that no significant difference was found. It is recognized that pilot or exploratory studies may lack the sample size to achieve definitive results, but they should be clearly labeled as pilot or exploratory studies.
The failure to a prioi define the primary endpoint(s) of the study and develop an appropriate statistical analysis plan can result in major problems when the manuscript with the study results is submitted to a journal. It is best, therefore, to consult a statistician when designing the study. Manuscripts can be rejected or have their acceptance significantly delayed if the statistical methodology is inappropriate. The reader should be told what is the primary endpoint(s) and what are the secondary endpoints. The number of endpoints evaluated does make a difference and it can be quite helpful to tell the reader the total number performed, especially if that number is large. Post hoc analyses should be considered exploratory.
One of the major goals of research is the sharing of new information. Great care should be taken in selecting the title and keywords for the manuscript as these may play a significant role in determining whether others see your paper. Additionally, for some, the abstract may be all that is read and so should be especially well written.
The actual selection of endpoints or outcomes, in addition to being critical in the design of an individual study, is also crucial if the results of that study are to be compared with results from other investigations. The COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) Initiative and the CROWN (Core Outcomes in Women’s and Newborn Health) Initiative are programs created to promote the development and use of core outcome setsCitation14,Citation15. Other core outcome sets are also in development.
This editorial has provided a partial reference list that may be of assistance to those new to designing a research project and preparing manuscripts from their research. Additionally, it encourages those considering the submission of manuscripts and needing assistance to seek that assistance early in the process.
Conflict of interest
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Source of funding
Nil.
References
- Bragge P. Asking good clinical research questions and choosing the right study design. Injury 2010;41(Suppl 1):S3–S6
- Christensen R, Langberg H. Statistical principles for prospective study protocols: design, analysis, and reporting. Int J Sports Phys Ther 2012;7:504–11
- Rosenthal R, Schäfer J, Briel M, Bucher HC, Oertli D, Dell-Kuster S. How to write a surgical clinical research protocol: literature review and practical guide. Am J Surg 2014;207:299–312
- Suresh K, Thomas SV, Suresh G. Design, data analysis and sampling techniques for clinical research. Ann Indian Acad Neurol 2011;14:287–90
- Mbotwa J, Singini I, Mukaka M. Discrepancy between statistical analysis method and study design in medical research: Examples, implications, and potential solutions. Malawi Med J 2017;29:63–5
- Martínez-Mesa J, González-Chica DA, Duquia RP, Bonamigo RR, Bastos JL. Sampling: how to select participants in my research study? An Bras Dermatol 2016;91:326–30
- Martínez-Mesa J, González-Chica DA, Bastos JL, Bonamigo RR, Duquia RP. Sample size: how many participants do I need in my research? An Bras Dermatol 2014;89:609–15
- Dekkers OM. Meta-analysis: Key features, potentials and misunderstandings. Res Pract Thromb Haemost 2018;2:658–63
- Light RW. Research: Why and how to write a paper? Rev Clín Esp 2015;215:401–404
- Vitse CL, Poland GA. Writing a scientific paper-A brief guide for new investigators. Vaccine 2017;35:722–8
- Brakoulias V, Macfarlane MD, Looi JC. The rites of writing papers: steps to successful publishing for psychiatrists. Australas Psychiatry 2015;23:32–6
- Baker PN. How to write your first paper. Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Med 2012;22:81–2
- Tuncel A, Atan A. How to clearly articulate results and construct tables and figures in a scientific paper? Turk J Urol 2013;39(Supp 1):16–19
- COMET Initiative [http://www.comet-initiative.org/] Accessed 11 December 2018
- CROWN Initiative [http://www.crown-initiative.org/] Accessed 11 December 2018