What a good introduction paragraph looks like?

Putting their research in context is of a major concern for all the health services researchers. This comes from the fact that health services research is not per se a hard science. Its research object is transversal over a large range of domains extending from occupational medicine to surgery passing by pharmacology and social sciences. Thus the importance of a strong introduction in our papers, expliciting what our research confirms or questions in the existing knowledge and what new knowledge it adds. There is no question to be able to do that without conducting beforehand a sound analysis of the literature. H Maisonneuve in his blog gave an interesting link to the Lancet’s definition of what a good introduction should look like in a medical research paper:

This Is What a Strong Introduction paragraph Looks Like:

 

Evaluation of Scientific Publications

Image via Wikipedia

In his blog named “OH-world” John Cherrie from Edinburgh, United Kingdom, signaled us an interesting series of seventeen articles freely available in full text on PubMedCentral. The first of the series is entitled Critical Appraisal of Scientific Articles; Part 1 of a Series on Evaluation of Scientific Publications.

The title of the following ones are listed below:

1. Critical Appraisal of Scientific Articles

2. Study Design in Medical Research

3. Types of Study in Medical Research

4. Confidence Interval or P-Value?

5. Requirements and Assessment of Laboratory Tests: Inpatient Admission Screening

6. Systematic Literature Reviews and Meta-Analyses

7. The Specification of Statistical Measures and Their Presentation in Tables and Graphs

8. Avoiding Bias in Observational Studies

9. Interpreting Results in 2×2 Tables

10. Judging a Plethora of p-Values: How to Contend With the Problem of Multiple Testing

11. Data Analysis of Epidemiological Studies

12. Choosing statistical tests

13. Sample size calculation in clinical trials

14. Linear regression analysis

15. Survival analysis

16. Concordance analysis

17. Randomized controlled trials

An other way to be able to evaluate a scientific article in medicine is to read the fourteen articles constituting the Clinical Chemistry Guide to Scientific Writing. The first article is entitled The Title Says It All.
The following articles are listed below:
Part 1. The Title Says It All

Part 2. The Abstract and the Elevator Talk: A Tale of Two Summaries

Part 3. “It was a cold and rainy night”: Set the Scene with a Good Introduction

Part 4. Who, What, When, Where, How, and Why: The Ingredients in the Recipe for a Successful Methods Section

Part 5. Show Your Cards: The Results Section and the Poker Game

Part 6. If an IRDAM Journal Is What You Choose, Then Sequential Results Are What You Use

Part 7. Put Your Best Figure Forward: Line Graphs and Scattergrams

Part 8. Bars and Pies Make Better Desserts than Figures

Part 9. Bring Your Best to the Table

Part 10. The Discussion Section: Your Closing Argument

Part 11. Giving Credit: Citations and References

Part 12. How to Write a Rave Review

Part 13. Top 10 Tips for Responding to Reviewer and Editor Comments

Part 14. Passing the Paternité Test

We thank Hervé Maisonneuve for having signaled this Guide in his blog.

Writing

Abbreviations of mathematical variables have to be italicised.

Which kind of list would you choose? A lettered, numbered, or bulleted list?

If you hesitate , refer to the table:

Punctuation and capitalization after punctuation represent another relevant issue if you search the best grammar for your paper:
The American Psychological Association blog gives you timeline advices on this matter.

Does the punctuation must be placed inside or outside the quotation marks? the answer is here.

How to perform a good academic writing (part II)

1) Choose a topic for your research paper that is debatable, plausible and consequential.

and that is not too broad but also not too narrow.

2) draft an outline with a question, a thesis, proofs (main reasons, supported ideas) and conclusion based on proofs.

For your introduction use an inverse pyramid from broad to specific ie from what have been already done (don’t reinvent the wheel) to your specific thesis

For your conclusion rearrange the pyramid from specific to broad ie what your data prove and is it generalizable?

3) Write

Lower your standards when beginning a writing project: don’t try to be perfect on your first attempt

Manage writing time, write ten minutes a day

Check for Consistency

Delete unnecessary words