U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • Int J Endocrinol Metab
  • v.17(4); 2019 Oct

Logo of ijem

The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Title

Zahra bahadoran.

1 Nutrition and Endocrine Research Center, Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Parvin Mirmiran

2 Department of Clinical Nutrition and Human Dietetics, National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute, Faculty of Nutrition Sciences and Food Technology, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Khosrow Kashfi

3 Department of Molecular, Cellular and Biomedical Sciences, Sophie Davis School of Biomedical Education, City University of New York School of Medicine, New York, United States

Asghar Ghasemi

4 Endocrine Physiology Research Center, Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

The title of a paper is “like a hat on a head or the front door to a house” and its initial impression. Writing a good and effective title makes the paper more retrievable by search engines and maximizes its impact in the scientific community. The paper’s title presents what has been studied, how it has been done, and what are the major results. A well-written title is balanced for being informative and concise, as well as attractively conveying the main topic, highlighting the importance of the study. For writing a good title, it should be drafted correctly, accurately, carefully, and meticulously by the main study keywords. By removing extra and unspecific words, the final title should be unambiguous, memorable, captivating, and informative. Here, we provided an overview of the importance and function of the title as well as different types of titles in scientific medical writing. We also focused on the content and organization of the title of a hypothesis-testing paper. In addition, the features of a good title were discussed.

The title is the “single most important line of a publication” ( 1 ). Although the title is a very small part of a research paper, it plays an important role in connecting the writer with potential readers. It also determines whether the paper is read or not ( 2 ). The title of a paper acts as a billboard, a descriptor, an advertisement ( 3 ), or a trailer for the movie ( 4 ). For every person who reads the whole paper, about 500 people only read the title, indicating that the majority of the papers are read by title alone ( 5 ). The title can influence the first impression of the work during the pre-publication process that occurs in the peer-review, as well as the post-publication process, which affects both dissemination and citations ( 3 , 6 ). Therefore, writing an effective title is an important step in scientific writing.

A good title provides a reconciliation between being attractive and being informative ( 4 ); it means that the title should motivate the readers to read an article, give them a summary of the contents, and provide an overview of the topics and findings ( 7 ). A well-written title will help other researchers to find the paper more easily ( 8 ), whereas a poorly written one may make a paper difficult to be retrieved by search engines, discourage readers to go through the text, and reduce an article’s impact ( 9 ). There are examples where journals have withdrawn a published paper because of it having a wrong title ( 10 ), a misleading or an inaccurate title ( 11 , 12 ), or for misuse of words within the title ( 13 ).

Following our previous reports on how to write and construct an introduction ( 14 ), materials and methods ( 15 ), results ( 16 ), and discussion ( 17 ) as sections of a scientific paper, here, we provided an overview of the importance and function of the title. We also focused on different types of titles that are commonly used in scientific and biomedical writings, in particular highlighting the function, content, and organization of the title in a hypothesis-testing paper.

2. Functions of the Title

The title of a biomedical scientific paper has two main functions ( 18 , 19 ): (1) to present the main topic or the message of the paper (the answer to the question) and (2) to attract potential readers and evoke their interest to read the paper. In fact, the title tells the readers what the paper is all about ( 6 , 19 ). The title also provides some keywords for further search ( 19 ) and facilitates the retrieval of the paper from bibliographic databases as this is used by the abstracting and documentation services in order to classify and index the paper ( 20 ).

3. Content of the Title

The main elements of a title include intervention, end-point or outcome, study population, and its specific conditions, design, and setting, which refers to a situation or a place that study was conducted at ( 21 ). The main elements in a hypothesis-testing paper, are (1) the independent variable(s) (X), (2) dependent variable(s) (Y), and (3) the study subjects (i.e. animal, population) or materials (i.e. culture media, cell line, tissue) (Z).

If important, the experimental approach and the condition of the animals/subjects during the study can also be included in the title ( 18 ). The specific organism or the biological system studied (e.g. animals, bacteria, cell culture) must always be included in the title ( 3 , 18 ). In case of humans, they are often removed from the title ( 3 , 18 ). It means that in biomedical journals, it is assumed that the species studied is human unless otherwise stated ( 3 ) and no population in the title indicates that the population is humans ( 18 ). However, if a subpopulation of humans was studied (e.g. patients who have asthma), that should be included in the title ( 18 ). Indication of the study setting (e.g. community-based, home-based, school-based, hospital-based, rural or urban setting) in the title is only important if the results are not generalizable to other settings, or if the setting reflects the magnitude of the research ( 21 ).

In descriptive papers, where a new structure is described, an important element of the title is to name that structure and its key function ( 18 ). In method papers, the name of the method (apparatus or material), its purpose, and the population where the method is used for are key elements of the title ( 18 ). According to the journal’s style or where appropriate, the study design may also be stated ( 8 ). This is especially true for randomized clinical trials, cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies ( 4 ). What this does is to alert the readers regarding the level of the evidence in the paper ( 4 ). Stating the study design in the title, usually located after a colon or an Em dash, makes the title more complete ( 21 ). Stating what type the review is (narrative, systematic or quantitative systematic) may also be helpful, especially for quantitative systematic reviews (meta-analysis) where a high level of evidence is suggested ( 4 ).

4. Organization of the Title

4.1. descriptive (neutral) titles.

Descriptive titles describe the subject of the paper but do not reveal the main conclusions ( 22 ) and are usually recommended as the best form of titles ( 23 ). Most of these contain all the elements of the research work (e.g. study population, intervention, study outcome, comparison) ( 21 , 23 ). In a hypothesis-testing paper, a descriptive title traditionally states the topic of the paper using its three essential pieces of information (dependent variable, independent variable, study subject or material), the so-called X, Y, and Z ( 18 ); e.g. a common form of such titles are “effect of X on Y in Z” (e.g. Effect of broccoli sprouts on insulin resistance in type 2 diabetic patients: a randomized double-blind clinical trial ( 24 )) or “Y during X in Z” (e.g. change of maternal serum triglycerides during third trimester of pregnancy in obese women). Usually, Z comes at the end of the title ( 18 ). Where there is no independent variable (X), the title would be Y in Z (e.g. dynamics of the chest wall in preterm infants) ( 18 ). If the study has several independent or dependent variables where they cannot be summarized under the general categories, it is advisable to select the most important ones ( 18 ) since these are new findings and should be presented in the title ( 25 ).

4.2. Declarative Titles

Declarative titles present the main conclusions or the actual message of the study ( 26 , 27 ). The message can be stated in a phrase or in a sentence ( 18 ). When the message is expressed in a phrase, an adjective or a noun (based on the verb used in the question and answer) or a combination of both are placed at the beginning of the title before the dependent variable; e.g. “reduced metabolic rate during radio-frequency irradiation in rats”, in which the message is expressed as an adjective, reduced ( 18 ). When the message is expressed in a sentence, a verb in the present tense is used; e.g. continuous positive airway pressure impairs renal function in anesthetized newborn goats ( 18 ). Using a sentence is stronger than using a phrase (because verbs convey an action more powerful than adjectives and nouns); therefore, it is used only when solid evidence supports a clear message ( 18 ). Some believe that using a sentence as a title overemphasize a conclusion and is best to be avoided ( 4 ).

In hypothesis-testing papers, the message of the paper can be stated in the title, where the message is strong and clear, and is supported by strong and solid evidence ( 18 , 23 ). Authors also need to be ensured that the title is true and is supported by the rest of the paper ( 28 ). When the title is a complete sentence, it conveys the impression that the study has reached a definite conclusion ( 19 ). e.g. “endothelium-derived relaxing factor produced and released from artery and vein is nitric oxide” ( 29 ).

Some believe that declarative titles would help authors to select a more appropriate paper during their search ( 27 ). For some types of papers such as commentaries, journals (e.g. obstetrics and gynecology) may push the authors to write a declarative title regarding the commentary’s main argument(s). Declarative titles give the impression that the findings of the study have general validity, which rarely is the case ( 26 ). Editors are, therefore, more cautious in accepting declarative titles due to its possible impact on public health ( 22 ) and some journals do not accept declarative titles (e.g. New England Journal of Medicine) ( 26 ). In addition, in case of choosing a declarative title, authors need to ask themselves will the title kill the curiosity? Will the readers lose motivation and interest to read the full article? ( 23 ).

Generally, the present tense in the title emphasizes the general validity of the results whereas the past tense indicates that the results are not established knowledge yet. To state results of a single investigation past tense and for results of a systematic review present tense should be used ( 27 ).

4.3. Interrogative Titles

To make a title more attractive, an interrogative form, which phrases the subject of the paper in the form of a question, can be used ( 30 ). However, in hypothesis-testing papers, interrogative titles are not recommended ( 31 ), because the reader would appreciate being told the answer from the beginning ( 30 ). An interrogative title may be appropriate for a review article, where the controversial issues are being discussed in response to the study question ( 30 ); e.g. are shorter article titles more attractive for citations? Cross-sectional study of 22 scientific journals ( 32 ). Interrogative titles in general lead to more paper down-loads but may result in fewer citations ( 22 ).

4.4. Compound Titles

Compound titles (or hanging titles) contain the main title and a subtitle ( 23 ) that are separated by a colon (:) ( 18 ). Compound titles can be started with a short question, a subject sentence, or a noun phrase, followed by a colon and a declarative sentence or a question ( 22 ). These types of titles are used to provide additional relevant information (e.g. about the study design, geographic or temporal scope of the research) or to add substance to a provocative area ( 23 ); e.g. developmental origins of type 2 diabetes: focus on epigenetics ( 33 ). They are useful for complex studies ( 19 ) and series papers ( 18 ). Using subtitles is not recommended except for putting an important word first ( 18 ). Papers with subtitles seem to be more attractive and are less likely to be rejected ( 34 ). In a compound title, the main part (main title) should be standalone ( 4 ).

4.5. Other Types of Title

Other styles, less commonly used to organize the title, are “indicating the direction of the author’s opinion”, “emphasizing the methodology used in the research”, “suggesting guidelines”, or “making a comparison” ( 35 ). To get more attention, the use of “effective opening”, “alliteration”, “irony”, “puns”, “humor” or “mystifying” ( 35 ) may also be used. However, the latter styles do help the paper grab readers’ attention, the authors need to ensure they will be understood and appreciated by all readers and are culturally appropriate ( 23 ). One example of referring to a parable in the title is: challenges for measuring oxytocin: the blind men and the elephant? ( 36 ), in which the subtitle refers to the parable of the 6 blind men and the elephant.

5. The Procedure of Writing an Effective Title

Although it is the first section of a paper that is seen ( 3 , 6 , 19 ), title is drawn from other sections of paper ( 3 ) and the final title is usually written as the last part ( 19 ). Good titles are created with care and craft ( 4 ). Writing a good title needs a back-and-forth process by continuous going back to the text with a sharper focus on what the paper is trying to say ( 35 ).

As shown in Figure 1 , a stepwise process is suggested to be followed to draft a title. What the authors need to do in the first step is to consider the manuscript entirely and then try to describe the content of the paper using essential keywords and phrases. Then, they need to make a sentence by the selected keywords and then remove redundant and nonspecific words/adjectives ( 20 ). The keywords used in the title should be the same as that used in the question and answer in the introduction, discussion, and abstract ( 18 ). The initial title must then be reviewed, refined and finally checked for having features of an effective final title. The title should not be hastily finalized; making a consultation with colleagues to get their opinion and possible suggestions can help improve the title ( 23 ). The authors are highly recommended to adhere to the style of the journal that they are submitting to e.g. word count, other instructions such as acceptable types of title (declarative and interrogative ones are unacceptable by some), use of capital letters, hyphens, colon, etc.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is ijem-17-4-98326-i001.jpg

6. Features of a Suitable Title

In addition to highlighting the subject matter (be informative), the title of the paper should be eye-catching (be attractive) ( 25 , 37 ). The most important concept should be placed at or near the beginning of the title (where it most readily catches the reader’s eye) ( 25 ). Table 1 describes the features of a good title. In brief, a well-written title should be attractive and engaging ( 4 , 6 , 26 ), comprehensive ( 8 , 37 ), accurate ( 18 ), sufficiently descriptive ( 37 ), complete ( 18 ), informative ( 3 , 4 , 6 , 8 ), and specific ( 4 , 18 , 37 ) as well as be concise ( 3 , 4 , 6 , 8 , 18 , 26 , 37 ), clear (unambiguous) ( 3 , 18 ) and begins with an important term ( 3 , 18 ). The title should not be too general ( 19 , 31 ) or too-detailed ( 31 ), be misleading or unrepresentative ( 26 ), omit major elements ( 19 ), or include unnecessary details ( 19 ).

7. Length of the Title

Although longer titles may provide more information regarding the content, they reduce the interest generated ( 39 ). A short title is easier to understand and can attract a wider readership and increase the influence of the paper ( 40 ). Therefore, the authors are advised to make the title as short as possible without sacrificing accuracy, completeness, specificity, and clarity ( 18 ). High-impact journals usually restrict the length of their papers’ titles ( 40 ).

Try to keep your title shorter than 100 characters (i.e. letters and punctuation marks), including spaces (120 characters are considered the upper limit) ( 18 ). As the rule of thumb, 10 - 12 words may be the ideal length of a paper ( 41 ) and the title should not be more than 12 words ( 31 ).

8. Word Choice in the Title

In addition to being relevant to the target audience ( 3 ), every word (excluding articles e.g. the, a, an, and prepositions e.g. to, about, on) used in the title should add significance ( 28 ). Words in the title need to be checked by Medical Subjects Headings (MeSH) ( 31 ). Using study keywords to formulate a title is highly recommended. Using the most important keywords in the title is essential for appropriate indexing purposes and for retrieval by search engines and available databases ( 38 ). Indexing services (e.g. PubMed) and search engines (e.g. Google) use keywords and terms in the title ( 3 , 6 ). Titles should not start with a numeral, or expressions like “a study of”, “a contribution to”, “investigations on” or “some interesting” ( 20 ). “Influence of” does not evoke much curiosity and if possible should be avoided ( 25 ).

Generally, the use of neutral words (e.g. inquiry, analysis, evaluation, assessment, etc.), that give no information to the readers, is not recommended ( 28 ). However, in some cases, these words may be necessary to inform the scope, intent, or type of a study ( 42 ). Although the use of catchy phrases or non-specific language is not recommended in academic writing, they can be used within the context of the study ( 42 ).

Adjectives (e.g. increased) that modify quantitative words (e.g. metabolic rate) are different from those (e.g. improved) that modify qualitative words (e.g. performance) ( 18 ). Some adjectives such as “novel” or “innovative” need to be replaced by more explicit adjectives to explain to the readers what makes the study novel ( 28 ); e.g. “A noninvasive method of predicting pulmonary-capillary wedge pressure” ( 43 ) or “An ultrasound method for safe and rapid central venous access” ( 44 ). If possible, replace long words with short ones ( 26 ). Try to avoid gerunds (verb forms that end in -ing) in the title as the actor is obscured ( 31 ). Avoid using generic terms such as animal, bacteria, or antibiotic as key terms ( 3 ).

Abbreviations confuse readers and usually are not used by indexing services ( 3 ). In some situations, e.g. long or technical terms in scientific writings, the use of abbreviations can be useful ( 21 ). Using abbreviations that appear as word entries in Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary ( 21 ), are better known than their words (e.g. DNA, AIDS, and FDA) ( 3 , 18 ), or abbreviations for chemicals (e.g. N 2 O 5 ), are acceptable in the title ( 18 ).

9. Word Order in the Title

Paying attention to syntax (word order) in the title is important because it can influence the reader’s interest in the paper ( 3 ). Generally, words at the beginning of the title make the most impact ( 20 ). Put an important word (e.g. independent or dependent variables) first in the title to attract readers ( 3 , 18 , 25 , 26 ). What you want to be emphasized as the primary subject matter i.e. the key concept of the paper needs to appear first and near the beginning of the title ( 3 , 25 ). Because search engines such as Google, typically show only the first 6 - 7 words of a title, most associated terms should, therefore, appear earlier ( 3 ). Using a subtitle (to state-specific topic) following the main title (to state general topic) is a technique for putting an important word or phrase first in the title ( 18 ); e.g. “Holistic review: shaping the medical profession one applicant at a time” ( 45 ) or “Medical school admissions: applicant projections revisited” ( 46 ).

10. Use of Preposition in the Title

A preposition is a word or a group of words used before a noun, pronoun, or noun phrase to show direction, time, place, location, spatial relationships, or to introduce an object. Correct use of prepositions in the title makes it more clear and helps the reader to understand how the title elements are related to each other ( 28 ). Typical prepositions used in the title, are by (to indicate how something is done), for (referring to a purpose), from (referring to the origin of something), in (referring to a location), of (belonging to or regrading) ( 28 ).

11. Running Title

To identify the articles in a journal, short phrases called running titles (running heads) appear at the top or bottom of every page or every other page ( 6 , 18 ). Running titles are short versions of the title ( 6 , 18 ) and help readers to keep track of the article throughout its printed pages ( 21 ). As running titles mostly cannot be longer than 50 characters (including the spaces), authors are recommended to use standard abbreviations and omit the study design ( 21 ). In hypothesis-testing papers, the running title usually names independent and dependent variables ( 18 ). The form “X and Y”, which is unspecific for the title can be used for the running title ( 18 ).

12. Title and Paper Citation

A well-organized title is positively associated with paper citation ( 47 ). Some studies have addressed how the feature and structure of a title can affect pre- and post-publication manuscript success ( 9 ). Association of title’s length and citation of the paper has remained inconclusive ( 47 , 48 ), however, papers with shorter titles ( 40 ) especially when presenting study conclusion ( 49 ) receive more citations ( 40 ). Analysis of published papers in the Lancet journal showed that titles with two components separated by a colon were significantly more common in the well-cited papers ( 47 ). Titles emphasizing broader conceptual or comparative issues get more attention than those being more specific (e.g. use of particular genus or species by their taxonomic name in the title) ( 9 ). Some factors such as referring to a specific country or geographical region may also lead to poor citation of the paper ( 47 , 49 ). Other factors such as punctuations and use of acronyms can also affect the citation rate of a paper ( 47 ). Use of “colon”, “hyphen” and “comma” was most frequent whereas “semi-colon”, “dash” and “single quotation marks” were least frequent punctuation marks in top-cited papers ( 50 ).

13. Conclusions

The essence of research is reflected in its title, which acts as a “signpost” for the main topic of the paper ( 31 ). In addition to presenting the message of the paper, the title should evoke interest in reading the paper. Appropriate types of a title (e.g. descriptive, declarative, interrogative) should be selected by the authors and in all cases, the title should be accurate, unambiguous, interesting, concise, precise, unique, and should not be misleading. “The Title” should present the substance of the work in a clear way.

Authors' Contribution: Study concept and design: Zahra Bahadoran and Asghar Ghasemi; drafting of the manuscript: Zahra Bahadoran, Parvin Mirmiran, and Asghar Ghasemi; critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Khosrow Kashfi and Parvin Mirmiran.

Conflict of Interests: The authors have no conflict of interest.

Funding/Support: This study was supported by the Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences.

Writing a strong scientific paper in medicine and the biomedical sciences: a checklist and recommendations for early career researchers

  • Open access
  • Published: 28 July 2021
  • Volume 72 , pages 395–407, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

  • Payam Behzadi 1 &
  • Márió Gajdács   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1270-0365 2 , 3  

14k Accesses

49 Citations

408 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Scientific writing is an important skill in both academia and clinical practice. The skills for writing a strong scientific paper are necessary for researchers (comprising academic staff and health-care professionals). The process of a scientific research will be completed by reporting the obtained results in the form of a strong scholarly publication. Therefore, an insufficiency in scientific writing skills may lead to consequential rejections. This feature results in undesirable impact for their academic careers, promotions and credits. Although there are different types of papers, the original article is normally the outcome of experimental/epidemiological research. On the one hand, scientific writing is part of the curricula for many medical programs. On the other hand, not every physician may have adequate knowledge on formulating research results for publication adequately. Hence, the present review aimed to introduce the details of creating a strong original article for publication (especially for novice or early career researchers).

Similar content being viewed by others

how to write a scientific paper pubmed

How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal

Clara Busse & Ella August

how to write a scientific paper pubmed

Why, When, Who, What, How, and Where for Trainees Writing Literature Review Articles

Gerry L. Koons, Katja Schenke-Layland & Antonios G. Mikos

how to write a scientific paper pubmed

Literature reviews as independent studies: guidelines for academic practice

Sascha Kraus, Matthias Breier, … João J. Ferreira

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

The writing and editing of scientific papers should be done in parallel with the collection and analysis of epidemiological data or during the performance of laboratory experiments, as it is an integral step of practical research. Indeed, a scholar paper is the figurative product of scientific investigations (Behzadi and Behzadi 2011 ; Singh and Mayer 2014 ). Moreover, the publication of scholarly papers is important from the standpoint of providing relevant information—both locally and internationally—that may influence clinical practice, while in academia, national and international academic metrics (in which the number and quality of papers determine the score and rank of the scientists) are relevant to fulfill employment criteria and to apply for scientific grants (Grech and Cuschieri 2018 ; Singer and Hollander 2009 ). Thus, scientific writing and the publication of quality peer-reviewed papers in prestigious academic journals are an important challenge for medical professionals and biomedical scientists (Ahlstrom 2017 ). Writing a strong scholarly paper is a multi-procedure task, which may be achieved in a right manner by using a balanced and well-designed framework or blueprint (Gemayel 2016 ; Tóth et al. 2020 ). All in all, time needs to be spent of writing a well-designed and thoughtful scientific proposal to support the research, which will subsequently end in the publication of a paper in a prestigious, peer-reviewed, indexed and scholarly journal with an impact factor (IF). A well-designed scientific project encompasses well-supported and strong hypotheses and up-to-date methodology, which may lead to the collection of remarkable (and reproducible!) data. When a study is based on a strong hypothesis, suitable methodology and our studies result in usable data, the next step is the analysis and interpretation of the said data to present a valuable conclusion at the end of our studies. These criteria give you an influent confidence to prepare a robust and prestigious scholarly paper (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ; Kallet 2004 ; Stenson et al. 2019 ). The aim of this review is to highlight all the necessary details for publication of a strong scientific writing of original article, which may especially be useful for novice or early career researchers.

Approaches for writing and formatting manuscripts before submission

In the presence of effective and appropriate items for writing a strong scientific paper, the author must know the key points and the main core of the study. Thus, preparing a blueprint for the paper will be much easier. The blueprint enables you to draft your work in a logical order (Gemayel 2016 ). In this regard, employment of a mass of charge, free or pay-per-use online and offline software tools can be particularly useful (Gemayel 2016 ; Behzadi and Gajdács 2020 ; Behzadi et al. 2021 ; Ebrahim 2018 ; Issakhanian and Behzadi 2019 ; O'Connor and Holmquist 2009 ; Petkau et al. 2012 ; Singh and Mayer 2014 ; Tomasello et al. 2020 ). Today, there are a wide range of diverse software tools which can be used for design and organization of different parts of your manuscript in the correct form and order. Although traditionally, many scientist do not use these softwares to help formulate their paper and deliver their message in the manuscript, they can indeed facilitate some stages of the manuscript preparation process. Some of these online and offline software facilities are shown in Table 1 .

The first step of writing any scientific manuscript is the writing of the first draft. When writing the first draft, the authors do not need to push themselves to write it in it’s determined order (Behzadi and Gajdács 2020 ; Gemayel 2016 ); however, the finalized manuscript should be organized and structured, according to the publisher’s expectations (Berman et al. 2000 ; Behzadi et al. 2016 ). Based on the contents of the manuscripts, there are different types of papers including original articles, review articles, systematic reviews, short communications, case reports, comments and letters to the editor (Behzadi and Gajdács 2020 ; Gemayel 2016 ), but the present paper will only focus on the original articles structured in the IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion) structure. Materials and methods, results, discussion or introduction sections are all suitable target sections to begin writing the primary draft of the manuscript, although in most cases, the methods section is the one written first, as authors already have a clear sense and grasp on the methodologies utilized during their studies (Ebrahim 2018 ). The final sections of IMRAD papers which should be completed are the abstract (which is basically the mini-version of the paper) and conclusion (Liumbruno et al. 2013 ; Paróczai et al. 2021 ; Ranjbar et al. 2016 ). The authors should be aware that the final draft of the manuscript should clearly express: the reason of performing the study, the individuality (novelty and uniqueness) of the work, the methodology of the study, the specific outcomes examined in this work, the importance, meaning and worth of the study. The lack of any of the items in the manuscript will usually lead to the direct rejection of the manuscript from the journals. During the composition of the manuscript (which corresponds to any and all sections of the IMRAD), some basics of scientific writing should be taken into consideration: scientific language is characterized by short, crisp sentences, as the goal of the publication is to deliver the main message concisely and without confusion. It is a common misconception that scientific writing needs to be “colorful” and “artistic,” which may have the opposite effect on the clarity of the message. As the main goal of publishing is to deliver the message (i.e., the results) of our study, it is preferred that scientific or technical terms (once defined) are used uniformly, with avoiding synonyms. If young scientists have linguistic difficulties (i.e., English is not their first language), it is desirable to seek the help of professional proofreading services to ensure the correct grammar use and clarity. Traditionally, the passive voice was expected to be used in scientific communication, which was intended to strengthen the sense of generalization and universality of research; however, nowadays the active voice is preferred (symbolizing that authors take ownership and accountability of their work) and sentences in passive voice should take up < 10% of the paper (Berman et al. 2000 ; Behzadi et al. 2016 ).

Every scientist should be able to present and discuss their results in their own words, without copy–pasting sentences from other scientists or without referring to the work of others, if it was used in our paper. If an author copies or represents another authors’ intellectual property or words as their own (accidentally or more commonly on purpose) is called plagiarism. Scientific journals use plagiarism checker softwares to cross-check the level of similarity between the submitted works and scientific papers or other materials already published; over a certain threshold of similarity, journals take action to address this issue. Plagiarism is highly unethical and frowned upon in the scientific community, and it is strictly forbidden by all relevant scientific publishers, and if one is caught with plagiarism, the scientific paper is usually rejected immediately (if this occurs during the submission process) or is retracted. There are some freely available online software tools (e.g., iThenticate® ( http://www.ithenticate.com/ ) and SMALL SEO TOOLS ( https://smallseotoolz.net/plagiarism-checker ) for authors to screen their works for similarities with other sources; nevertheless, it is also unethical to use these tools to determine the “acceptable” level of similarity (i.e., cheating) before submitting a paper.

The structure of an IMRAD article includes the title, author’s(s’) name(s), author’s(s’) affiliation(s), author’s(s’) ORCID iD(s) ( https://orcid.org/ ), abstract, keywords, introduction, methods (or materials and methods), results, discussion, conclusion, acknowledgements, conflict of interest and references (Behzadi and Behzadi 2011 ; Singh and Mayer 2014 ). The acronym of ORCID (with a hard pronunciation of C ( https://orcid.org/blog/2013/01/07/how-should-orcid-be-pronounced )) (abbreviation of Open Researcher & Contributor ID) is considered as unique international identifier for researchers (Haak et al. 2012 ; Hoogenboom and Manske 2012 ). The ORCID iD is composed of 16 digits and introduced in the format of https URI ( https://support.orcid.org/hc/en-us/articles/360006897674 ). It is recommended for the authors to register their ORCID iD. The ORCID is important for manuscript submissions, manuscript citations, looking at the works of other researchers among other things (Haak et al. 2012 ; Hoogenboom and Manske 2012 ).

The contents of the IMRAD-structured manuscripts

Although the IMRAD format seems to be a cul-de-sac structure, it can be a suitable mold for both beginners and professional writers and authors. Each manuscript should contain a title page which includes the main and running (shortened) titles, authors’ names, authors’ affiliations (such as research place, e-mail, and academic degree), authors’ ORCID iDs, fund and financial supports (if any), conflicts of interest, corresponding author’s(s’) information, manuscript’s word count and number of figures, tables and graphs (Behzadi and Gajdács 2020 ).

As the title is the first section of your paper which is seen by the readers, it is important for the authors to take time on appropriately formulating it. The nature of title may attract or dismiss the readers (Tullu and Karande 2017 ). In this regard, a title should be the mirror of the paper’s content; hence, a proper title should be attractive, tempting, specific, relevant, simple, readable, clear, brief, concise and comprehensive. Avoid jargons, acronyms, opinions and the introduction of bias . Short and single-sentenced titles have a “magic power” on the readers. Additionally, the use of important and influent keywords could affect the readers and could be easy searchable by the search engines (Cuschieri et al. 2019 ). This can help to increase the citation of a paper. Due to this fact, it is recommended to consider a number of titles for your manuscript and finally select the most appropriate one, which reflects the contents of the paper the best. The number of titles’ and running titles’ characters is limited in a wide range of journals (Cuschieri et al. 2019 ).

The abstract is the vitrine of a manuscript, which should be sequential, arranged, structured and summarized with great effort and special care. This section is the second most important part of a manuscript after title (Behzadi and Gajdács 2020 ). The abstract should be written very carefully, deliberately and comprehensively in perfect English, because a well-written abstract invites the readers (the editors, reviewers, and readers who may cite the paper in the future) to read the paper entirely from A to Z and a rough one discourages readers (the editors and reviewers) from even handling the manuscript (Cuschieri et al. 2019 ). Whether we like it or not, the abstract is the only part of the manuscript that will be read for the most part; thus, the authors should make an effort to show the impressiveness and quality of the paper in this section.

The abstract as an independent structured section of a manuscript stands alone and is the appetizer of your work (Jirge 2017 ). So as mentioned, this part of paper should be written accurately, briefly, clearly, and to be facile and informative. For this section, the word count is often limited (150 to 250/300 words) and includes a format of introduction/background/, aim/goal/objective, methods, results and conclusions. The introduction or background refers to primary observations and the importance of the work, goal/aim/objective should represent the hypothesis of the study (i.e., why did you do what you did?), the methods should cover the experimental procedures (how did you do what you did?), the results should consider the significant and original findings, and finally, the clear message should be reported as the conclusion. It is recommended to use verbs in third person (unless specified by the Journal’s instructions). Moreover, the verbs depicting the facts which already have been recognized should be used in present tense while those verbs describing the outcomes gained by the current work should be used in past tense. For beginners in scientific publishing, it is a common mistake to start the writing of the manuscript with the abstract (which—in fact—should be the finalizing step, after the full text of the paper has already been finished and revised). In fact, abstract ideally is the copy-pasted version of the main messages of the manuscript, until the word limit (defined by the journal) has been reached. Another common mistake by inexperienced authors is forgetting to include/integrate changes in the abstract to reflect the amendments made in the bulk text of the paper. All in all, even a paper with very good contents and significant results may could be rejected because of a poor and weak abstract (Behzadi and Gajdács 2020 ).

Keywords are the key point words and terms of the manuscript which come right after abstract section. The keywords are used for searching papers in the related fields by internet search engines. It is recommended to employ 3 to 10 keywords in this section. The keywords should be selected from the MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) service, NCBI ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/ ). An appropriate title should involve the most number of keywords (Behzadi and Gajdács 2020 ; Jirge 2017 ).

Introduction section should be framed up to four paragraphs (up to 15% of the paper’s content). This section should be progressed gradually from general to specific information and gaps (in a funnel-formed fashion). In another words, the current condition of the problem and the previous studies should be briefly presented in the first paragraph. More explanation should be brought in discussion section, where the results of the paper should be discussed in light of the other findings in the literature (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ). In this regard, the original articles and some key references should be cited to have a clarified description. The second paragraph should clarify the lack of knowledge regarding the problem at present, the current status of the scientific issue and explain shortly the necessity and the importance of the present investigation. Subsequently, the relevance of this work should be described to fill the current gaps relating to the problem. The questions (hypothesis/purpose) of the study comprising “Why did you do?/What did you do?/So What?” should be clarified as the main goal in the last paragraph (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ; Burian et al. 2010 ; Lilleyman 1995 ; Tahaei et al. 2021 ). A concise and focused introduction lets the readers to have an influent understanding and evaluation for the performance of the study. The importance of the work presented should never be exaggerated, if the readers feel that they have been misled in some form that may damage the credibility of the authors’ reputation. It is recommended to use standard abbreviations in this section by writing the complete word, expression or phrase for the first time and mentioning the related abbreviation within parenthesis in this section. Obviously, the abbreviations will be used in the following sentences throughout the manuscript. The authors should also adhere to international conventions related to writing certain concepts, e.g., taxonomic names or chemical formulas. In brief, the introduction section contains four key points including: previous studies, importance of the subject, the presence of serious gap(s) in current knowledge regarding the subject, the hypothesis of the work (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ; Lilleyman 1995 ; Tahaei et al. 2021 ). Previously, it was recommended by majority of journals to use verbs in past tense and their passive forms; however, this shows a changing trend, as more and more journals recommend the use of the active voice.

Materials and methods

As the materials and methods section constitutes the skeleton of a paper (being indicative of the quality of the data), this section is known as the keystone of the research. A poor, flawed or incorrect methodology may result in the direct rejection of manuscripts, especially in high IF journals, because it cannot link the introduction section into the results section (Haralambides 2018 ; Meo 2018 ). In other words, the methods are used to test the study’s hypothesis and the readers judge the validity of a research by the released information in this section. This part of manuscript belongs to specialists and researchers; thus, the application of subheadings in a determined and relevant manner will support the readers to follow information in a right order at the earliest. The presentation of the methodologies in a correct and logical order in this section clarifies the direction of the methods used, which can be useful for those who want to replicate these procedures (Haralambides 2018 ; Juhász et al. 2021 ; Meo 2018 ). An effective, accurate, comprehensive and sufficient description guarantees the clarity and transparency of the work and satisfies the skeptical reviewers and readers regarding the basis of the research. The following questions should be answered in this section: “What was done?” and “How was it done?” and “Why was it done?”

The cornerstones of the methods section including defining the type of study, materials (e.g., concentration, dose, generic and manufacturer names of chemicals, antibiotics), participants (e.g., humans, animals, microorganisms), demographic data (e.g., age, gender, race, time, duration, place), the need for and the existence of an ethical approval or waiver (in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and its revisions) for humans and animals, experimental designs (e.g., sampling methods, time and duration of the study, place), protocols, procedures, rationale, criteria, devices/tools/techniques (together with their manufacturers and country of origin), calibration plots, measurement parameters, calculations, statistical methods, tests and analyses, statistical software tools and version among many other things should be described here in methods section (Haralambides 2016 ; Stájer et al. 2020 ). If the details of protocols make this section extremely long, mention them in brief and cite the related papers (if they are already published). If the applied protocol was modified by the researcher, the protocol should be mentioned as modified protocol with the related address. Moreover, it is recommended to use flow charts (preferably standard flow charts) and tables to shorten this section, because “a picture paints a thousand words” (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ; Lilleyman 1995 ; Tahaei et al. 2021 ).

The used online guidelines in accordance with the type of study should be mentioned in the methods section. In this regard, some of these online check lists, including the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement ( http://www.consort-statement.org/ ) (to improve the reporting randomized trials), the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement ( http://www.prisma-statement.org/ ) (to improve the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses), the STARD (Standards for Reporting Diagnostic accuracy studies) statement ( http://www.equator-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/STARD-2015-checklist.pdf ) (to improve the reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies), the STORBE (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology) statement ( https://www.strobe-statement.org/index.php?id=strobe-home ) (to improve the reporting of observational studies in Epidemiology), should be mentioned and highlighted in medical articles. Normally, the methods section begins with mentioning of exclusion (depicting safe selection) and inclusion (depicting no bias has happened) criteria (regarding the populations studied) and continues by the description of procedures and data collection. This section usually ends by the description of statistical data analyses. As mentioned in a previous section, older recommendations in “Instructions for authors” suggested the use of verbs in past tense, in 3rd person and passive forms, whereas novel guidelines suggest more text written in the active voice (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ; Lilleyman 1995 ; Tahaei et al. 2021 ).

The results including negative and positive outcomes should be reported clearly in this section with no interpretation (Audisio et al. 2009 ; Behzadi et al. 2013 ). The most original information of an IMRAD paper originates from the results section. Indeed, the reported findings are the main core of the study which answers to the research question (hypothesis) “what was found?” The results section should answer all points brought up in the methods section. Categorization of findings by subheadings from the major to minor results, chronologically or by any logical order, facilitates readers to comprehend the results in an effective and influent manner (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ; Lilleyman 1995 ; Tahaei et al. 2021 ).

Representing the motive of experiments, the related experimental setups, and the gained outcomes supports the quality and clarity of your results, because these components create logical and influent communications between obtained data, observations and measurements. The results section should represent all types of data (major to minor), variables (dependent and independent), variables effects and even accidental findings. The statistical analyses should be represented at the end of results section. The statistical significance should be represented by an exact amount of p value ( p  < 0.05 is usually recognized and set as the threshold for statistical significance, while p  > 0.05 depicts no statistical significance). Moreover, the mentioning of the 95% confidence intervals and related statistical parameters is also needed, especially in epidemiological studies (Mišak et al. 2005 ).

It is recommended to use tables, figures, graphs and charts in this section to give an influent representation of results to the readers. Using well-structured tables deeply impresses the readers. Usually the limitation of the number of figures, graphs, tables and charts is represented in the section of instructions for authors of the journal. Remember that well-designed tables and figures act as clean mirrors which transfer a clear and sharp illustration of your work and your efforts in preparing the manuscript. Thus, a well-designed graph, table, charts or figure should be understood easily; in other words, they should be represented as self-explanatory compartments. Avoid repeating the represented data in figures, tables, charts and graphs within the text. Citing figures, graphs, charts and tables in right positions within the text increases the impact and quality of your manuscript (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ; Lilleyman 1995 ; Tahaei et al. 2021 ). Showing the highest and lowest amounts in tables by bolding or highlighting them is very effective. Normally, the legends are placed under graphs and figures and above the tables. It is recommended to begin the figure legends with conclusion and finish it by important technical key points.

Discussion and conclusion

This section represents the interpretations of results. In other words, discussion describes what these results do mean by the help of mechanistic interpretations of causes and effects. This argument should be achieved sharp and strong in a logical manner (Gajdács 2020 ; Rasko et al. 2016 ). The interpretations should be supported by relevant references and evidences. Usually, the first paragraph of discussion involves the key points of results. The represented data in results section should not be repeated within the discussion section. Magnification and exaggeration of data should never occur! “A good wine needs no bush.” Care about the quality of discussion section, because this part of the manuscript is determinative item for the acceptance of the paper (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ).

Avoid representing new data in discussion, which were not mentioned in the results section. The following paragraphs should represent the novelty, differences and/or similarities of the obtained findings. Unusual and findings not predicted should be highlighted (Gajdács 2020 ; Rasko et al. 2016 ). It is important to interpret the obtained results by the strong references and evidences. Remember that citation of strong and relevant references enforces your evaluations and increases the quality of your points of view (Mack 2018 ; Shakeel et al. 2021 ). The probable weaknesses or strengths of the project should be discussed. This critical view of the results supports the discussion of the manuscript. The discussion section is finished by the final paragraph of conclusion. A critical paragraph in which the potential significance of obtained findings should be represented in brief (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ). The bring/take-home message of the study in conclusion section should be highlighted. For writing a conclusion, it is recommended to use non-technical language in perfect English as it should be done in abstract section (Alexandrov 2004 ). It is suggested to use verbs in present tense and passive forms, if not otherwise mandated by the journal’s instructions. In accordance with policy of journals, the conclusion section could be the last part of discussion or presented within a separate section after discussion section (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ).

Acknowledgements

This section is placed right after discussion and/or conclusion section. The unsaid contributors with pale activities who cannot be recognized as the manuscripts’ authors should be mentioned in acknowledgement section. Financial sponsors, coordinators, colleagues, laboratory staff and technical supporters, scientific writing proof readers, institutions and organizations should be appreciated in this section. The names listed in acknowledgements section will be indexed by some databases like US National Library Medicine (NLM) ( https://www.nlm.nih.gov/ ) (Ahlstrom 2017 ).

Conflict of interest

If the authors have any concerns regarding moral or financial interests, they should declare it unambiguously, because the related interests may lead to biases and suspicions of misconducts (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ; Lilleyman 1995 ; Tahaei et al. 2021 ). This section usually comes right after acknowledgements and before references.

Application of relevant and pertinent references supports the manuscript’s scientific documentary. Moreover, utilization of related references with high citation helps the quality of the manuscript. For searching references, it is recommended to use search engines like Google Scholar ( https://scholar.google.com/ ), databases such as MEDLINE ( https://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/medline.html ) and NCBI ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ ) and Web sites including SCOPUS ( https://www.scopus.com/ ), etc.; in this regard, the keywords are used for a successful and effective search. Each journal has its own bibliographic system; hence, it is recommended to use reference management software tools, e.g., EndNote®. The most common bibliographic styles are APA American Psychological Association, Harvard and Vancouver. Nevertheless, the authors should aware of retracted articles and making sure not to use them as references (Ahlstrom 2017 ; Behzadi 2021 ; Lilleyman 1995 ; Tahaei et al. 2021 ). Depending on the journal, there are different limitations for the number of references. It is recommended to read carefully the instructions for authors section of the journal.

Conclusions for future biology

From the societal standpoint, the publication of scientific results may lead to important advances in technology and innovation. In medicine, patient care—and the biomedical sciences in general—the publication of scientific research may also lead to substantial benefits to advancing the medical practice, as evidence-based medicine (EBM) is based on the available scientific data at the present time. Additionally, academic institutions and many academic centers require young medical professionals to be active in the scientific scene for promotions and many employment prospects. Although scientific writing is part of the curricula for many medical programs, not every physician may have adequate knowledge on formulating research results for publication adequately. The present review aimed to briefly and concisely summarize the details of creating a favorable original article to aid early career researchers in the submission to peer-reviewed journal and subsequent publication. Although not all concepts have been discussed in detail, the paper allows for current and future authors to grasp the basic ideas regarding scientific writing and the authors hope to encourage everyone to take the “leap of faith” into scientific research in medicine and to submit their first article to international journals.

Data accessibility

Not applicable.

Ahlstrom D (2017) How to publish in academic journals: writing a strong and organized introduction section. J East Eur Cent Asian Res 4(2):1–9

Google Scholar  

Alexandrov AV (2004) How to write a research paper. Cerebrovasc Dis 18(2):135–138

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Audisio RA, Stahel RA, Aapro MS, Costa A, Pandey M, Pavlidis N (2009) Successful publishing: how to get your paper accepted. Surg Oncol 18(4):350–356

Behzadi P (2021) Peer review publication skills matter for academicians. Iran J Pathol 16(1):95–96

Behzadi P, Behzadi E (2011) A new aspect on how to write an original article, 1st edn. Persian Science & Research Publisher, Tehran

Behzadi P, Gajdács M (2020) Dos and don’ts of a successfully peer-reviewed publication: from A-Z. Eur J Microbiol Immun 10:125–130

Article   Google Scholar  

Behzadi E, Behzadi P, Ranjbar R (2013) Abc’s of writing scientific paper. Infectioro 33(1):6–7

Behzadi P, Najafi A, Behzadi E, Ranjbar R (2016) Microarray long oligo probe designing for Escherichia coli: an in-silico DNA marker extraction. Cent Eur J Urol 69(1):105–111

CAS   Google Scholar  

Behzadi P, García-Perdomo HA, Karpiński TA (2021) Toll-like receptors: general molecular and structural biology. J Immunol Res 2021:e9914854

Berman HM, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat TN, Weissig H, Shindyalov IN, Bourne PE (2000) The protein data bank. Nucl Acids Res 28(1):235–242

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Burian K, Endresz V, Deak J, Kormanyos Z, Pal A, Nelson D, Virok DP (2010) Transcriptome analysis indicates an enhanced activation of adaptive and innate immunity by chlamydia-infected murine epithelial cells treated with interferon γ. J Infect Dis 202:1405–1414

Cuschieri S, Grech V, Savona-Ventura C (2019) WASP (write a scientific paper): structuring a scientific paper. Early Human Dev 128:114–117

Ebrahim AN (2018) Publishing Procedure and Strategies to Improve Research Visibility and Impact. https://figshare.com/articles/presentation/Publishing_Procedure_and_Strategies_to_Improve_Research_Visibility_and_Impact/7475036

Gajdács M (2020) Taxonomy and nomenclature of bacteria with clinical and scientific importance: current concepts for pharmacists and pharmaceutical scientists. Acta Pharm Hung 89(4):99–108

Gemayel R (2016) How to write a scientific paper. FEBS 283(21):3882–3885

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Grech V, Cuschieri S (2018) Write a scientific paper (WASP)-a career-critical skill. Early Human Dev 117:96–97

Haak LL, Fenner M, Paglione L, Pentz E, Ratner H (2012) ORCID: a system to uniquely identify researchers. Learn Publ 25(4):259–264

Haralambides HE (2016) Dos and don’ts in scholarly publishing. Marit Econ Logist 18(2):101–102

Haralambides HE (2018) Dos and don’ts of scholarly publishing (part II). Marit Econ Logist 20(3):321–326

Hoogenboom BJ, Manske RC (2012) How to write a scientific article. Int J Sports Phys Ther 7(5):512–517

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Issakhanian L, Behzadi P (2019) Antimicrobial Agents and Urinary Tract Infections. Curr Pharm Des 25(12):1409–1423

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Jirge PR (2017) Preparing and publishing a scientific manuscript. J Hum Reprod Sci 10(1):3–9

Juhász J, Ligeti B, Gajdács M, Makra N, Ostorházi E, Farkas FB, Stercz B, Tóth Á, Domokos J, Pongor S, Szabó D (2021) Colonization dynamics of multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae are dictated by microbiota-cluster group behavior over individual antibiotic susceptibility: a metataxonomic analysis. Antibiotics 10(3):e268

Kallet RH (2004) How to write the methods section of a research paper. Resp Care 49(10):1229–1232

Lilleyman J (1995) How to write a scientific paper—a rough guide to getting published. Arch Dis Child 72(3):268–270

Liumbruno GM, Velati C, Pasqualetti P, Franchini M (2013) How to write a scientific manuscript for publication. Blood Transf 11(2):217–226

Mack CA (2018) How to write a good scientific paper. The United States of America: Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) Press. ISBN 9781510619135

Meo SA (2018) Anatomy and physiology of a scientific paper. Saudi J Biol Sci 25(7):1278–1283

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Mišak A, Marušić M, Marušić A (2005) Manuscript editing as a way of teaching academic writing: experience from a small scientific journal. J Second Lang Writ 14(2):122–131

O’Connor TR, Holmquist GP (2009) Algorithm for writing a scientific manuscript. Biochem Mol Biol Educ 37(6):344–348

Paróczai D, Sejben A, Kókai D, Virók DP, Endrész V, Burián K (2021) Beneficial immunomodulatory effects of fluticasone propionate in chlamydia pneumoniae-infected mice. Pathogens 10(3):e338

Petkau A, Stuart-Edwards M, Stothard P, Van Domselaar G (2012) Interactive microbial genome visualization with GView. Bioinformatics 26(24):3125–3126

Ranjbar R, Behzadi P, Mammina C (2016) Respiratory tularemia: Francisella tularensis and microarray probe designing. Open Microbiol J 10:176–182

Rasko Z, Nagy L, Radnai M, Piffkó J, Baráth Z (2016) Assessing the accuracy of cone-beam computerized tomography in measuring thinning oral and buccal bone. J Oral Implant 42:311–314

Shakeel S, Iffat W, Qamar A, Ghuman F, Yamin R, Ahmad N, Ishaq SM, Gajdács M, Patel I, Jamshed S (2021) Pediatricians’ compliance to the clinical management guidelines for community-acquired pneumonia in infants and young children in Pakistan. Healthcare 9(6):e701

Singer AJ, Hollander JE (2009) How to write a manuscript. J Emerg Med 36(1):89–93

Singh V, Mayer P (2014) Scientific writing: strategies and tools for students and advisors. Biochem Mol Biol Educ 42(5):405–413

Stájer A, Kajári S, Gajdács M, Musah-Eroje A, Baráth Z (2020) Utility of photodynamic therapy in dentistry: current concepts. Dent J 8(2):43

Stenson JF, Foltz C, Lendner M, Vaccaro AR (2019) How to write an effective materials and methods section for clinical studies. Clin Spine Surg 32(5):208–209

Tahaei SAS, Stájer A, Barrak I, Ostorházi E, Szabó D, Gajdács M (2021) Correlation between biofilm-formation and the antibiotic resistant phenotype in staphylococcus aureus isolates: a laboratory-based study in Hungary and a review of the literature. Infect Drug Res 14:1155–1168

Tomasello G, Armenia I, Molla G (2020) The protein imager: a full-featured online molecular viewer interface with server-side HQ-rendering capabilities. Bioinformatics 36(9):2909–2911

Tóth Á, Makai A, Jánvári L, Damjanova I, Gajdács M, Urbán E (2020) Characterization of a rare bla VIM-4 metallo-β-lactamase-producing Serratia marcescens clinical isolate in Hungary. Heliyon 6(6):e04231

Tullu M, Karande S (2017) Writing a model research paper: a roadmap. J Postgrad Med 63(3):143–146

Download references

Payam Behzadi would like to thank the Islamic Azad University, Shahr-e-Qods Branch, Tehran, Iran, for approving the organization of the workshop on “How to write a scientific paper?” Márió Gajdács would also like to acknowledge the support of ESCMID’s “30 under 30” Award.

Open access funding provided by University of Szeged. Márió Gajdács was supported by the János Bolyai Research Scholarship (BO/00144/20/5) of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and the New National Excellence Programme (ÚNKP-20-5-SZTE-330) of the Ministry of Human Resources.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Microbiology, College of Basic Sciences, Shahr-e-Qods Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, 37541-374, Iran

Payam Behzadi

Institute of Medical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Nagyvárad tér 4, 1089, Hungary

Márió Gajdács

Department of Pharmacodynamics and Biopharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Szeged, Szeged, Eötvös utca 6., 6720, Hungary

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Márió Gajdács .

Ethics declarations

The authors declare that they have no competing interests, monetary or otherwise.

Ethical statement

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Behzadi, P., Gajdács, M. Writing a strong scientific paper in medicine and the biomedical sciences: a checklist and recommendations for early career researchers. BIOLOGIA FUTURA 72 , 395–407 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42977-021-00095-z

Download citation

Received : 08 April 2021

Accepted : 16 July 2021

Published : 28 July 2021

Issue Date : December 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s42977-021-00095-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Scientific research
  • Publications
  • Medical publications
  • Clinical medicine
  • Peer review
  • Academic training
  • Abstracting and indexing
  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

How to write a scientific paper--writing the methods section

Affiliation.

  • 1 Department of Health Information and Decision Sciences-HINDS (CIDES), Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade do Porto e Centro de Investigação em Tecnologias e Sistemas de Informação em Saúde, CINTESIS, Porto, Portugal. [email protected]
  • PMID: 21821389
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.rppneu.2011.06.014
  • Research Design
  • Writing / standards*

IMAGES

  1. 12 Good Books On How To Write And Publish Research Papers

    how to write a scientific paper pubmed

  2. 💣 Scientific write up example. Writing Up A Scientific Experiment. 2022

    how to write a scientific paper pubmed

  3. How to write a scientific review paper

    how to write a scientific paper pubmed

  4. How to Write a Scientific Review Paper

    how to write a scientific paper pubmed

  5. 10 Expert Tips: Elsevier's 2023 Guide to Writing a Scientific Paper

    how to write a scientific paper pubmed

  6. How to Write a Scientific Paper

    how to write a scientific paper pubmed

VIDEO

  1. 新手如何起步寫論文丨寫論文實戰技巧丨 Systematic review and meta-analysis 系統性回顧與統合分析丨impact factor收集系列 @EBSCOTaiwan

  2. Pubmed / SCI-HUB

  3. How to Use ChatGPT to Write Scientific Research Paper

  4. HOW TO WRITE SCIENTIFIC PAPER

  5. Search PubMed for Academic Articles

  6. Scientific Report Writing

COMMENTS

  1. How to write a good scientific review article

    How to write a good scientific review article FEBS J. 2022 Jul;289 (13):3592-3602. doi: 10.1111/febs.16565. Paraminder Dhillon Affiliation The FEBS Journal Editorial Office, Cambridge, UK. PMID: 35792782 DOI: 10.1111/febs.16565 Abstract Literature reviews are valuable resources for the scientific community.

  2. How to write a scientific paper

    2016 Nov;283 (21):3882-3885. doi: 10.1111/febs.13918. Rita Gemayel The FEBS Journal Editorial Office, Cambridge, UK. 27870269 10.1111/febs.13918 In the first instalment of the Words of Advice series, we feature the essentials of good manuscript writing with practical tips on how to plan, organise and write a standout scientific paper.

  3. How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed ...

    Abstract Communicating research findings is an essential step in the research process. Often, peer-reviewed journals are the forum for such communication, yet many researchers are never taught how to write a publishable scientific paper.

  4. Successful Scientific Writing and Publishing: A Step-by-Step Approach

    Go to: Abstract Scientific writing and publication are essential to advancing knowledge and practice in public health, but prospective authors face substantial challenges. Authors can overcome barriers, such as lack of understanding about scientific writing and the publishing process, with training and resources.

  5. How To Write And Publish A Scientific Manuscript

    How To Write And Publish A Scientific Manuscript Martin R. Huecker; Jacob Shreffler. Author Information and Affiliations Last Update: October 31, 2022. Go to: Definition/Introduction A clinician should continuously strive to increase knowledge by reviewing and critiquing papers, thoughtfully considering how to integrate new data into practice.

  6. HOW TO WRITE A SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE

    Reviewers consider the following five criteria to be the most important in decisions about whether to accept manuscripts for publication: 1) the importance, timeliness, relevance, and prevalence of the problem addressed; 2) the quality of the writing style (i.e., that it is well‐written, clear, straightforward, easy to follow, and logical); 3) t...

  7. Writing a scientific article: A step-by-step guide for beginners

    We describe here the basic steps to follow in writing a scientific article. We outline the main sections that an average article should contain; the elements that should appear in these sections, and some pointers for making the overall result attractive and acceptable for publication. Previous Next Scientific publications Writing Research Article

  8. A Practical Guide to Writing (and Understanding) a Scientific Paper

    Writing a scientific paper is a relevant part of the activities of medical doctors and is increasingly important for the progress of medical knowledge. Clinical outcomes can only be improved through research, education, and patient care. All these experiences are shared with the global community, primarily through peer-reviewed research papers ...

  9. Guide to writing and publishing a scientific manuscript ...

    Writing a scientific manuscript for a peer-reviewed medical journal can be a frustrating but ultimately very satisfying process. Benefits for the authors include the ability to share the results of their project with a large audience and the opportunity to change practice, the satisfaction of completing a challenging scholarly endeavor, and the recognition of your institution in terms of ...

  10. [Guide to write a scientific article]

    All rights reserved. Publishing a scientific article is challenging for early-career researchers and clinicians. Success is not solely determined by robust research methods, but also by clear and logical presentation of results. Without clear communication, disruptive findings can be overlooked. A well-structured manusc …

  11. PDF How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper

    How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper Seventh Edition An essential guide for succeeding in today's competitive environment, this book provides beginning scientists and experienced researchers with practical advice on writing about their work and getting published. This new, updated edition discusses the latest print and internet resources.

  12. How to Write Your First Research Paper

    Abstract Writing a research manuscript is an intimidating process for many novice writers in the sciences. One of the stumbling blocks is the beginning of the process and creating the first draft. This paper presents guidelines on how to initiate the writing process and draft each section of a research manuscript.

  13. How to Write a Scientific Paper

    1 Introduction Writing a scientific paper requires thorough understanding of the process of getting a scientific paper published. The publisher curates a repository for your data, but there is an important context that drives the process. In research, careers are built on the visibility and perceived value of your papers.

  14. Tips and tricks for writing a scientific manuscript

    Tips and tricks for writing a scientific manuscript J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2020 Jul-Aug;34 (4 Suppl. 3):441-449. Congress of the Italian Orthopaedic Research Society. Authors

  15. How to Write a Scientific Paper: Practical Guidelines

    Go to: Abstract Precise, accurate and clear writing is essential for communicating in health sciences, as publication is an important component in the university criteria for academic promotion and in obtaining funding to support research.

  16. How to Write the Introduction to a Scientific Paper?

    First Online: 24 October 2021 57k Accesses 148 Altmetric Abstract An Introduction to a scientific paper familiarizes the reader with the background of the issue at hand. It must reflect why the issue is topical and its current importance in the vast sea of research being done globally.

  17. The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Abstract and Keywords

    In a scientific paper, the abstract is an accurate summary of the main aspects of the entire manuscript, usually in one paragraph of 150 - 300 words, using a simple, clear way of writing ( 4 ). An abstract is a truncated version of the paper that summarizes every aspect of the study ( 5 ).

  18. Writing and publishing a scientific paper

    This text is designed to give the reader a helping hand in writing a scientific paper. It provides generic advice on ways that a scientific paper can be improved. The focus is on the following ethical and non-technical issues: (1) when to start writing, and in what language; (2) how to choose a good title; (3) what should be included in the various sections (abstract, introduction ...

  19. How to write a good scientific review article

    Literature reviews are valuable resources for the scientific community. With research accelerating at an unprecedented speed in recent years and more and more original papers being published, review articles have become increasingly important as a means to keep up-to-date with developments in a particular area of research.

  20. [A Beginners' Guide to Scientific Writing and Critical Reading]

    To write a scientific article, authors are required to use simple and direct expressions to avoid unnecessary misunderstandings. The introduction section must be attractive and flow from providing general to specific information, and the final discussion section should pertain to specific matter and end with general statements.

  21. The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Title

    Go to: 1. Context The title is the "single most important line of a publication" ( 1 ). Although the title is a very small part of a research paper, it plays an important role in connecting the writer with potential readers. It also determines whether the paper is read or not ( 2 ).

  22. Writing a strong scientific paper in medicine and the biomedical

    Scientific writing is an important skill in both academia and clinical practice. The skills for writing a strong scientific paper are necessary for researchers (comprising academic staff and health-care professionals). The process of a scientific research will be completed by reporting the obtained results in the form of a strong scholarly publication. Therefore, an insufficiency in scientific ...

  23. How to write a scientific paper--writing the methods section

    How to write a scientific paper--writing the methods section. How to write a scientific paper--writing the methods section. How to write a scientific paper--writing the methods section Rev Port Pneumol. 2011 Sep-Oct;17(5):232-8. doi: 10.1016/j.rppneu.2011.06.014.