Tips & Tricks for

Drafting a Health
Research Article
Natasha Gulati
Customer Success Manager, Elsevier Health SEA
May 2023
Workshop Objective

Provide practical
recommendations to
effectively write a manuscript
based on good practices to
increase the chances of
getting published in a peer-
reviewed journal.
Agenda
• Overview of the research process
• What do Editors look for?
• Recommendations and best practices while
writing the Tables & Figures, Results,
Methodology, Discussion/ Conclusion in a
manuscript
• Additional resources
Overview of the Research
Process

4
The research process Research
topic
1. Identify the research topic (acquire)
Knowledge
Submit
2. Review the literature to identify the knowledge gap

gap (appraise)
3. Formulate specific research question/s,
Research
Draft article
objectives and hypothesis question
Research
process
4. Choose study type (obs vs. interv.) and decide
on type of data, methods, statistical tests
5. Write the study protocol (research proposal) Data
Study type
analysis
6. Conduct the study
7. Process and analyze the data Study
Study
protocol
8. Write the article
9. Submit for publication
For more details: Research Process Steps; Research and the process; IV Generating Evidence: The Research Process
Types of published research
Original Article Review Article Case Report
Written by the person or Summarizes the current Unexpected or novel
team that conducted the state of understanding on occurrence is described
experiment or a topic within a certain in a detailed report of
observations → Primary discipline → Secondary findings, clinical course,
Source Source and prognosis of an
individual patient

Letter to the Editor Methodologies

Basic letter addressing A new experimental
core issues that the method, test or
sender wishes to procedure. The method
highlight. Comment on a described may either be
previous article completely new or may
offer a better version

Source: https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/authorandreviewertutorials/writing-a-journal-manuscript/types-of-journal-
articles/10285504
6
What do Editors Look for?

7
Basic structure of a published research
• Abstract

• Introduction
Add on – Letter to
the Editor
• Literature Review

• Methodology – with hypothesis

• Key Findings

• Results – discussion, implication,

conclusion

• References

Source:
8
Snapshot of the peer review and editorial process
Journal /
Journal editorial The author
Author Manuscript
editor board is informed
submits is peer
screens decide of the
manuscript reviewed
manuscript whether to decision
publish

Some
manuscripts
are rejected
before peer
6-60%
review

Source: http://www.editage.com/insights/peer-review-process-and-editorial-decision-making-at-journals
9
• Does my research fall within BMJ Open’s aims and scope?
• Is the research question clear?
• Is the study design appropriate?
• Is the study valid?
• Is the research presented correctly?

Source: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/pages/authors/#submission_guidelines
 Clarity is the sole obligation of the science writer,
yet I find constantly that the ‘What’s new’ element
is buried. Answering one central question — What
did you do? — is the key to finding the structure of
a piece. Every section of the manuscript needs to
support that one fundamental idea.

Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-02404-4
Reasons for research rejection
• Unfitting topic

• Poorly designed research

• Inadequate execution Published

papers
rejected at
least once
62%
• Unacceptable writing

• Inadequate or a complete lack

of publication strategy Source: Rejection of Manuscripts: Problems and
Solutions accessed on 01/07/19

Source: https://www.elsevier.com/connect/8-reasons-i-rejected-your-article
12
Starting with Tables, Figures
& Results

13
Tables and Figures
• Play a key role in improving the
manuscript’s quality.
• Save time and space when
representing numerical data.
• They significantly reduce the
length of the manuscript.
• They provide the editors,
reviewers and readers a quick
overview of the study findings.
• They improve understanding
and interpretation of the study
results.
http://www.editage.com/insights/tips-on-effective-use-of-tables-and-figures-in-research-papers
 | 17

• Describe in the legend

any abbreviations and

symbols used.

• Unify decimal places

• Make sure the

percentages add 100%.

• Use a clean layout and legible font.

• Leave sufficient spacing between

columns and rows.

20
Do not use special

effects or 3D graphs.
• To ensure symmetry, it is recommended that the authors first design the
table/ figure, add the labels, and finally add the numbers.

• Use a clean layout and legible font.

• Leave sufficient space between columns and rows.

• For submission, leave one table/figure per page unless as specified in

author guidelines.

• Place them at the end of the manuscript, after the references (Author
Guidelines).
• Add a descriptive title and describe in the legend any abbreviations
and symbols used: they are key to understanding the table or figure.
• Ensure consistency between values or details in the table and those
in the abstract and text (print and compare).
• Make sure the percentages add 100%.

• Do not use Power Point to format figures unless you can ensure the
resolution required by the journal.

• Do not use special effects or 3D graphs.

0.162 0.2
• Unify decimal places.
3 3.0
0.001 <1
 Results
• Answer the question WHAT.
• Written in past tense.
• Depending on the type of study and
study design they will need to
include one type of information or
other.
• Use http://www.equator-network.org/
to find the specific reporting
guideline.
• Should only include the most
relevant data.
• Make sure the results are the consequence of the methods used.
• Make sure the results answer the questions raised in the
Introduction.
• Do not include results whose methods have not been described.
• To ensure consistency, make sure that the numbers in the text match
the numbers in the tables and abstract.
• Avoid starting phrases with an abbreviation, acronym or number.
• Use numbered headings and subheadings to group similar results.
Writing the Methodology

29
Methods
• Answer the question HOW.
• Already included in the study protocol.
• Written in past tense.
• Should answer the following questions:
✓ Who? Study population (inclusion and exclusion
criteria).
✓ How? Study design.
✓ Why? What are we expecting to find? Outcomes.
✓ What was done with the data? Statistical methods.
• Describe the essential and critical steps of your experiment.

• Make sure they contain enough details to replicate them (transparency!).

• Double check that names of materials, equipment, reagents, genes, proteins used are correct.

• Do not include methods that have not produced results.

• Do not include introduction, results, or discussion.

• Include lengthy methods in the references or in “supplementary materials/methods”

section.
• Use
numbered
headings
and
subheadin
gs to group
methods.
 Discussion – The Most
Important & Difficult Section

34
Discussion
• It is the most important (and hardest)
section to write.

• Many articles are rejected because the

discussion is weak.

“I won’t know why I should care

about your experiment until you
tell me why I should”.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-02404-4
 How to structure the Discussion:
1. Are my results clinically and scientifically relevant? The reader must be remined of
the importance of what he/she just read.

2. What is the impact of my results on the current body of knowledge?

3. Are they comparable to other studies of similar design? (for example, similar
disease, stage, dosage, treatment).

4. If not, why not? Consideration of possible mechanisms and reasons for the
differences.
 Discussion/ Recommendations
• Select between 3-5 articles similar to yours that allow for comparisons.

• Reference studies from other countries and centers.

• Reference key people in the subject you are writing about.

• Use short phrases (30-35 words).
• Use transitional words such as “therefore”, “however”, “thus”,
“conversely”, “consistent with”, “in contrast to”...
• Finish with the study limitations and a conclusion.
• Avoid adding “further studies are needed” without explaining why.

• Do not discuss results that have not been presented in the results or described
in the methods sections.

• Do not repeat the results.

• Do not repeat the introduction.

• Do not make assumptions that the results cannot support.

• Follow the order defined in the
Results and Methods sections.
• Use numbered sections.
Limitations
Conclusion/s
• Written in present tense.

• Should be directly related to your research question and stated

purpose of the study.

• Should be based on the study results described in the article.

• Should convey the impact of my findings (even if my results are

negative).

• Should not be a copy of the abstract.

• Should encourage further experiments.

| 43
| 44
Open Discussion on
Introduction

45
Questions
www.orcid.org
www.equator-network.org
 | 49

www.editage.com/insights
 | 50

https://researcheracademy.elsevier.com/
 | 51

Explore the many masterclasses, listen to the ones you like best and obtain a certificate!
 | 52

https://www.elsevier.com/about/careers
• Don't be disappointed... it happens to
everyone.
• Try to understand WHY.
• Read reviewers' comments carefully.
• Be critical.
• If you intend to submit the article to
another journal, approach it as a new
article:
• Follow reviewers' comments.
• Read the Author Guidelines of the
new journal over and over again.
Thank you!

Natasha Gulati
Customer Success Manager
Elsevier Health, SEA

ELSEVIER | Clinical Solutions

+6012 5656 109
n.gulati@Elsevier.com