An editorial is a short opinion piece written by an editor or guest that addresses an issue and aims to provide a concise yet well-reasoned argument. It should clearly state the problem or question in the introduction, present evidence for possible answers in the middle paragraphs, and conclude with a final answer in the closing paragraph. While shorter than a research paper, an editorial still follows the basic structure of critical argument by outlining the issue, discussing evidence, and coming to a logical conclusion. The tight word limit requires the message to be delivered in a clear and sequential manner.

1. HOW TO WRITE AN EDITORIAL
An editorial may be written by the editor or someone invited by the editor. It serves many
other purposes, including concise reviews of topics that do not warrant a full-length invited
review, and other topics on very recent developments that are deemed by the editor to be
important to readers of the journal and the community. As there is typically a limited space
in which to deliver its contents, the message contained in the editorial needs to be well
thought out and concisely delivered. It should contain the correct sequence of the elements
of critical argument, ideally supported by evidence, and end with a clear conclusion.
Structure of the Editorial
Writing an editorial is in some ways more demanding than writing a research paper. The
well-known conventional format for research papers is a relatively easy model into which to
fit data and interpretations; at first glance the editorial has no format. The research paper
usually runs to more than two printed pages, and an occasional slackening in it s thought
process may not be noticed; the editorial is short, and flawed ideas and sequence stand
out. So the task is to fit into a tight space content with a clear and logical sequence.
The task is easier if the steps of critical argument are kept in mind. The editorialist has to:
- Pick an issue, a problem, a question
- Pose one or more possible answers;
- Weight the evidence supporting possible answers;
- Assess counter-evidence; and
- Conclude with an answer. The answer might seem to e that there is no answer and
that more information is needed, but that is itself an answer! Even such an answer
is reached in a well-reasoned editorial through critical argument.
Table 3 illustrates how the structure and sequence of an editorial relate to the elements of
critical argument. The length of an editorial, the number of paragraphs, depend on how
complex a problem it considers, the amount of evidence it examines, and the number of
possible answers. Some editorials may consist of only one paragraph and yet carry the
main elements of argument in their natural sequence.
The opening paragraph states the first element of the argument: >The problem or
Question=. Most readers will need more than a simple statement of the problem. Experts
on the subject will know what new events or new knowledge led to awareness that a
problem needs an answer, but most editorials are not written for a small number of experts.
The question of how much background information to include in the lead-in to the
statement of the problem is probably best answered as it is for the Introduction to a
research paper. The editorialist should assume that readers know less than he does about
the topic of the editorial but are well informed on the larger subject field within which the
topic lies. The author of an editorial on the usefulness of laparotomy in staging Hodgkin=s
disease should assume that the reader knows less than experts experienced with this use
of laparotomy but is well informed in general on recent developments in Hodgkin=s
disease and knows the meaning of >laparotomy= and of >staging=. The editorialist can
then open the editorial with a brief summary of the not-entirely-satisfactory of the methods

2. for staging or with a summary of the current controversy on laparotomy, depending on the
actual situation. This stance will guarantee an adequate, if brief, lead-in, while avoiding a
long-winded and patronizing ramble to the main point to be made by the end of the
introductory paragraph.
Paragraphs Elements of Critical Argument
Introductory Paragraph
Too many people cannot afford good medical care;
we need national health insurance.
Statement of the problem;
tentative answer
Middle Paragraphs
National health insurance would spread costs among
industry and the wealthy.
Other countries have successful national health
insurance.
Our country cannot afford such insurance in face of
competing demands for defence spending.
Evidence in support
Evidence in support
Counter-evidence
Closing Paragraph
Health is more important than military spending. We
should work politically to get top priority for national
health insurance.
Assessment of all evidence;
final answer.
Although the middle paragraphs of an editorial carry the evidence considered in the
argument, they differ from one of the counterpart sections of a research paper, the Results,
in not presenting detailed data. They resemble more the paragraphs in a discussion in that
the evidence is likely to consist of statements supported by citations to published papers.
Usually there is not enough space in an editorial to examine >the credibility of evidence=;
the reader can assume that the >credibility= of papers selected for citation in the editorial
was >examined= by the editorialist while reading the papers considered as possible
references.
The closing paragraph should carry a clear final answer to the question posed in the
opening paragraph. If the answer is that there is no answer, so be it. But then the
editorialist may wish to suggest possible routes to new evidence that may dispose of the
no-answer answer.
A Variant of the Editorial:
The position paper

3. Some journals have a section for opinion papers that the editor prefers not to publish as
editorials. The papers may be too long, or may take positions the editor does not wish to
seem to support by giving the editorial cachet of approval. Two such sections are
>Sounding Board= of The New England Journal of Medicine and >Perspective= of Annals
of Internal Medicine. Well-written papers of this kind usually have the same structure as a
clear and logical editorial, although they may differ widely in their use of documented
reasoning and rhetorical heat. The points made above about editorials apply as well to
position papers.
Conclusion
An editorial has little room in which to deliver its message. The structure must be well
worked out, with the right sequence of the elements of critical argument, lest the very
brevity of the editorial expose all too clearly any flaws in logic.
Reference
Huth E J (editor) 1982 How to Write and Publish Papers in the Medical Sciences. Chapter
8: The Editorial. 2
nd
edition: 69 - 71