What Is a Peer Reviewed Journal and What Did You Think About the Article That You Read?

• Journal List
• J Oral Maxillofac Pathol
• v.17(one); Jan-Apr 2013
• PMC3687192

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

Art of reading a journal commodity: Methodically and finer

RV Subramanyam

Department 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, it is essential to develop a method to choose and read the right manufactures.

Objective:

To outline a logical and orderly approach to reading a scientific manuscript. Past breaking down the task into smaller, step-by-step 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 showtime. If a conclusion is made to read the entire article, the primal elements of the commodity can be perused in a systematic fashion effectively and efficiently. A cogent and organized method is presented to read articles published in scientific journals.

Conclusion:

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

Keywords: Articles, journal, reading, research, systematic

INTRODUCTION

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

John Naisbitt

Information technology has become essential for the clinicians, researchers, and students to read manufactures from scientific journals. This is not only to continue beside of progress in the speciality concerned but too to be aware of 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 carrying out their experiments. Scientific literature in that field will help ane sympathise what has already been discovered and what questions remain unanswered and thus help in designing ane'due south enquiry projection. Sackett (1981)[1] and Durbin (2009)[2] suggested various reasons why near of u.s. read periodical manufactures and some of these are listed in Table i.

Tabular array 1

Common reasons for reading journal articles

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

In spite of the cyberspace rapidly gaining a strong foothold as a quick source of obtaining information, reading periodical articles, whether from impress or electronic media, still remains the well-nigh common way of acquiring new information for nearly of us.[2] Newspaper reports or novels tin can be read in an insouciant manner, merely reading research reports and scientific articles requires concentration and meticulous approach. Now, at that place are 1312 dentistry journals listed in Pubmed.[5] How can i choose an article, read it purposefully, effectively, and systematically? The aim of this article is to provide an answer to this question by presenting an efficient and methodical approach to a scientific manuscript. Notwithstanding, the reader is informed that this newspaper is mainly intended for the amateur reader unaccustomed to scientific literature and non for the professional interested in critical appraisal of journal manufactures.

TYPES OF Journal Manufactures

Dissimilar types of papers are published in medical and dental journals. One should be aware of each kind; especially, when one is looking for a specific blazon of an commodity. Table two gives dissimilar categories of papers published in journals.

Tabular array ii

Types of articles published in a periodical

In full general, scientific literature can be primary or secondary. Reports of original enquiry form the "primary literature", the "core" of scientific publications. These are the articles written to present findings on new scientific discoveries or describe before work to acknowledge it and place new findings in the proper perspective. "Secondary literature" includes review manufactures, books, editorials, practice guidelines, and other forms of publication in which original enquiry information is reviewed.[six] An commodity published in a peer-reviewed periodical is more valued than 1 which is non.

An original research commodity should consist of the post-obit headings: Structured abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) and may be Randomized Command Trial (RCT), Controlled Clinical Trial (CCT), Experiment, Survey, and Case-control or Accomplice written report. Reviews could be non-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 well-nigh 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 outcome of a specific inquiry question.[7–ix] Some are invited reviews, requested by the Editor, from an expert in a particular bailiwick.

A case study is a report of a single clinical example, whereas, a example series is a description of a number of such cases. Example reports and instance series are description of disease (south) mostly 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 express text. Commentary is a curt article on an author's personal opinion of a specific topic and could be controversial. An editorial, written by the editor of the journal or invited, tin exist perspective (about articles published in that item effect) or persuasive (arguing a specific signal of view). Other articles published in a journal include letters to the editor, volume reviews, conference proceedings and abstracts, and abstracts from other journals.[10]

WHAT TO READ IN A Journal? – CHOOSING THE RIGHT Commodity

Non all enquiry articles published are excellent, and it is pragmatic to decide if the quality of the study warrants reading of the manuscript. The first pace for a reader is to choose a correct article for reading, depending on one's individual requirement. The adjacent stride is to read the selected commodity methodically and efficiently.[two] A unproblematic conclusion-making flowchart is depicted in [Figure 1], 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 journal.

Schematic flowchart of the first step in choosing an article to read

HOW TO START READING AN ARTICLE?

"In that location is an art of reading, likewise as an art of thinking, and an art of writing."

Clarence Day

At first glance, a journal article might announced intimidating for some or disruptive for others with its tables and graphs. Reading a research article tin be a frustrating feel, especially for the one who has not mastered the art of reading scientific literature. Just like in that location is a method to extract a tooth or fix a cavity, 1 tin can also larn to read research manufactures by following a systematic approach. Most scientific manufactures are organized every bit follows:[ii,xi]

1. Title: Topic and information almost the authors.

2. Abstract: Brief overview of the article.

3. Introduction: Background data and statement 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 interpretation of the results and implications of the study.

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

Review articles practice non usually follow the in a higher place pattern, unless they are systematic reviews or meta-assay. The fundamental rule is: Never start reading an article from the beginning to the stop. It is better to brainstorm past identifying the conclusions of the study by reading the championship and the abstract.[12] If the article does not have an abstract, read the conclusions or the summary at the terminate of the article first. Later on reading the abstract or conclusions, if the reader deems it is interesting or useful, then the entire article tin can be read [Figure 2].

Conclusion-making flowchart to determine whether to read the chosen article or not

THE TITLE

Similar the championship of a movie which attracts a filmgoer, the title of the article is the one which attracts a reader in the first place. A good title will inform the potential reader a great deal about the study to decide whether to become alee with the paper or dismiss information technology. Most readers prefer titles that are descriptive and self-explanatory without having to look at the entire article to know what information technology is all about.[two] For example, the paper entitled "Microwave processing – A blessing for pathologists" gives an idea virtually the article in full general to the reader. Only there is no indication in the title whether it is a review commodity on microwave processing or an original research. If the title had been "Comparing of Microwave with Conventional Tissue Processing on quality of histological sections", even the insouciant reader would have a better understanding of the content of the newspaper.

ABSTRACT

Abstract helps us determine whether we should read the entire article or non. In fact, about journals provide abstract gratuitous of cost online allowing u.s. to make up one's mind whether nosotros need to purchase the entire commodity. Most scientific journals at present take a structured abstract with separate subheadings similar introduction (background or hypothesis), methods, results and conclusions making it easy for a reader to identify important parts of the study rapidly.[13] Moreover, in that location is normally a brake about the number of words that can be included in an abstract. This makes the abstract concise enough for 1 to read chop-chop.

The abstract tin be read in a systematic way past answering certain fundamental questions like what was the study nigh, why and how was the study conducted, the results and their inferences. The reader should make a note of whatever questions that were raised while reading the abstract and exist sure that answers take been found later on reading the entire article.[12]

Reading the entire commodity

In one case the reader has decided to read the entire article, one can begin with the introduction.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the introduction is to provide the rationale for conducting the report. This section normally starts with existing knowledge and previous research of the topic nether consideration. Typically, this section concludes with identification of gaps in the literature and how these gaps stimulated the researcher to pattern a new written report.[12] A good introduction should provide proper background for the study. The aims and objectives are ordinarily mentioned at the end of the introduction. The reader should also determine whether a research hypothesis (study hypothesis) was stated and later cheque 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 research articles, all details are rarely included merely at that place should be enough information to understand how the written report was carried out.[12] Information about the number of subjects included in the study and their categorization, sampling methods, the inclusion criteria (who tin can exist in) and exclusion criteria (who cannot exist in) and the variables called can exist derived by reading this department. The reader should get acquainted with the procedures and equipment used for data drove and discover out whether they were advisable.

RESULTS OF THE Study

In this section, the researchers give details about the data nerveless, either in the form of figures, tables and/or graphs. Ideally, interpretation of data should non be reported in this section, though statistical analyses are presented. The reader should meticulously become through this segment of the manuscript and observe out whether the results were reliable (aforementioned results over time) and valid (measure what it is supposed to measure). An of import aspect is to check if all the subjects present in the first of the study were accounted for at the terminate of the study. If the answer is no, the reader should bank check whether any explanation was provided.

Results that were statistically significant and results that were not, must be identified. One should too observe whether a correct statistical test was employed for analysis and was the level of significance appropriate for the study. To appreciate the choice of a statistical test, ane requires an understanding of the hypothesis being tested.[14,15] Tabular array 3 provides a list of commonly used statistical tests used in scientific publications. Clarification and interpretation of these tests is beyond the scope of this paper. It is wise to remember the following advice: Information technology is not only important to know whether a difference or association is statistically significant only also capeesh whether it is big or substantial enough to be useful clinically.[16] In other words, what is statistically meaning may non be clinically significant.

Table 3

Bones statistics commonly used in scientific publications

Give-and-take

This is the most important section of the article where the research questions are answered and the pregnant of analysis and interpretation of the information are presented. Usually the study results are compared with other studies, explaining in what aspects they were different or like. Ideally, no new data should be presented nether word and no information from other sections should be repeated.[2] In addition, this section besides discusses the various strengths and limitations/shortcomings of the study, providing suggestions nearly areas that need additional research.

The meaning of results and their analyses, new theories or hypotheses, limitations of the study, explanation of differences and similarities with other comparable studies, and suggestions for time to come research are offered in this section. It is important to recollect that the discussions are the authors' interpretations and opinions and non necessarily facts.

READING THE CONCLUSION (Again !)

Though conclusion function had been read at the kickoff, it is prudent to read it once again at the end to confirm whether what we had inferred initially is correct. If the conclusion had not made sense earlier, it may brand sense after having perused through the entire commodity. Sometimes, the study conclusions are included in the discussion section and may not be easy to locate. The questions that tin can be asked nether various sub-headings of an original research paper are presented equally a simple questionnaire in Table 4. Information technology is assumed that 1 who is using this questionnaire has read and analyzed the abstract and then decided to read the entire article. This questionnaire does not critically analyze a scientific article. However, answers to these questions provide a systematic approach to obtain a broad overview of the manuscript, specially to a novice. If ane who is new to reading manufactures, writing answers to these questions and taking notes will help in understanding most aspects of a research article.

Table 4

Questionnaire for original inquiry manufactures

Decision

"Let us read with method, and propose to ourselves an end to which our studies may betoken. The employ of reading is to aid us in thinking."

Edward Gibbon

It has become mandatory to read scientific literature to exist well-informed of e'er-expanding information and/or for better diagnosis, prognosis and therapy. Since there is an abundance of journals and articles, it is critical to develop a modus operandi for achieving a rapid, purposeful, effective and useful method to read these manuscripts. A uncomplicated but efficient and logical approach to scientific literature has been presented hither for choosing manufactures and reading them systematically and effectively for a better understanding.

Footnotes

Source of Support: Nothing.

Disharmonize of Involvement: None declared.

REFERENCES

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

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

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

6. Hersh W. Information Retrieval: A Health and Biomedical Perspective (Health Information science) third ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2009. p. 68. 80, 85. [Google Scholar]

vii. 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 gratis article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Peh WC, Ng KH. Basic construction and types of scientific papers. Singapore Med J. 2008;49:522–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Hudson-Barr D. How to read a inquiry commodity. J Spec Pediatr Nurs. 2004;9:70–2. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: Writing and editing for biomedical publication. [Terminal accessed on 2011 October x]. Available from: http://www.icmje.org/urm_main.html .

14. Hess DR. How to write an constructive discussion. Respir Care. 2004;49:1238–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. 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 Study and Testing a Test: How to read the medical evidence. 5th ed. Philadelphia, USA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2005. p. 45. [Google Scholar]

---

Articles from Periodical of Oral and Maxillofacial Pathology : JOMFP are provided hither courtesy of Wolters Kluwer -- Medknow Publications

---

moorethistility.blogspot.com

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

Share this post