The document provides guidance on writing clinical papers. It acknowledges that many papers are written to get published rather than to be read. It outlines common errors in clinical paper writing, including titles that do not match the study, abstracts that exceed word limits or lack important details, introductions that include irrelevant information or omit hypotheses, and methods, results, and discussion sections that do not clearly report on the study design and findings. The document emphasizes writing concisely and focusing on communicating results to readers. It encourages learning from rejections to improve papers for resubmission.

1. The art of clinical paper
writing
Dr. Aparna Govil Bhasker
Bariatric & Laparoscopic Surgeon, Mumbai
Managing Committee Member- OSSI, AMC
Member- IFSO Communication Committee
Global, Currae, Apollo Spectra, Surya, Namaha and Suchak Hospitals, Mumbai
www.bestbariatricsurgeon.org www.aparnagovilbhasker.com
draparnagovil@gmail.com
+91981956618

2. No Disclosures

3. We are guilty…………
• Because we write papers to get published, not for them to be read
• Because a publication means another line on our CV, another
research grant or a promotion
• And for those of us who write too many scientific papers, we don’t
want to make the effort to improve
• Because of our reluctance due to lack of time and mentorship

4. “There was a strong correlation between the sexual
orientation of those sharing a strain, with 71% of the 197
strains shared by two or more individuals recovered
exclusively from either men who have sex with men or
heterosexuals (86% of these were from groups of individuals
who were at least 80% of a single sexual orientation), with the
remaining 29% of strains seen in both men who have sex with
men and heterosexuals”.
(Choudhury et al, 2006).
Scientific writing usually looks like this….

5. • The purpose of a scientific paper is to communicate results and
analysis to the wider scientific community.
• The better a paper is written, the more readers it will attract and the
more citations it is likely to receive.
• This alone should be sufficient to convince any scientist to put
significant effort into his or her writing; unfortunately, this is rarely
the case.
However………… Accepted
Read
Cited

6. Top ten reasons for rejection………..

7. Common criticisms of submitted manuscripts….

8. Skill of writing is not
« inherited »
But, can be learnt

9. Disclaimer
These principles are not for bad research to be
published but to prevent good research from
appearing to be bad research!!

10. The first paper is always the most difficult one
Do not hesitate to take help
It is not rocket science
Change your outlook and you will realize that
there is science in everything that we do
Most rewarding experience

11. Title………
What is needed Common errors
Short and succinct Either too long or too short
Easy to understand but intriguing enough
to generate interest
Does not match the article or the study
design
Sometimes you may have conclusions or
questions in title
Includes abbreviations, jargon or tries to be
too witty at the expense of clarity
Inadequately describes the study

12. Abstract………
What is needed Common errors
Abstract is the mirror of the whole article Exceeds the number of words specified by
the journal
Objective, study design (methods), results
and conclusion
Incorrect format as per the journal
Clear to the reader, who may not read the
entire article
Lacks enough detail to summarize the
article
Should not be too long (journal
specifications)
Omits important findings and highlights
unnecessary ones
Inaccurately reflects the contents of the
manuscript or findings of the study

13. Introduction………
What is needed Common errors
Sets the tone for the reader and the reviewer Contains material that is irrelevant to the study
Ideally 2 paragraphs Does not include background information and
foundational research
Para 1- Rationale; Justifying the need to do the
study and clarifying the new information that
the study aims to offer.
It should also convince the reader that it is not
a fishing expedition
Contains material that belongs to other
sections like results, methods and discussion
Para 2- Must clearly state the study objective
or hypothesis
Omits or vaguely describes the hypothesis
Unnecessarily long and unsubstantiated
statements

14. Materials and methods………
What is needed Common errors
Study design Does not follow current guidelines for study designs
(CONSORT, MOOSE, QUORUM etc)
Documentation of IRB approval Does not provide adequate information and it is not
possible to duplicate the study
Demographics Inappropriate statistical methods
Inclusion and exclusion criteria Lacks details of ethical approval or consent
Clear description of procedures or tests Fails to declare clinical trial registry
Clear definition of exposures and primary and
secondary outcomes
Fails to include statements about ethics in case of
human subjects
Sample size calculation
Types of measurements used
Methods of statistical analysis and level of
significance

16. Results………
What is needed Common errors
Results must give all outcome measures in
materials and methods
Inappropriate or incomplete reporting of data
or statistics
Appropriate tables, figures, text Redundant reporting of findings in text, tables
and figures
Each table or figure must be judiciously used
without repetition
Methods or discussion are discussed in results
Easy to understand and interpret Technical jargon that focuses on statistical
function than results
Succinct and self explanatory Duplication
Data presentation should be so clear that even a tired person riding late on a
plane can take your manuscript and get the message at the first reading

17. Discussion………
What is needed Common errors
Clear statement of what the principal findings
were, as well as the new knowledge that
the current study offered
Includes material that is unrelated to the study and /or
interjects irrelevant opinions
Comparison of the findings of the current
study with those of previous studies
Contains material that is redundant to the
introduction or results
Clarification regarding the similarities
and differences with the findings of previous
Studies and possible explanations of different findings
Does not explain how the findings contribute to the
larger body of evidence
Clear and concise conclusion of the meaning of the
study as it relates to clinical practice or
future research; and
Overinterprets findings, making them appear more or
less meaningful than they actually are
Strengths and weaknesses of the study Ignores the current body of knowledge in the are of
the study
Proposal for future research (“more research is
necessary ”)
Limitations are not included or are downplayed

18. Conclusion………
What is needed Common errors
Insightful statements about the importance and
relevance of the study
Do not repeat content from other parts of the
manuscript
Do not replicate the abstract Statements that are not supported by the study
Do not give unsupported claims Too long (Its not the discussion)
Brief with clear answers

19. Common errors:
• Improper citation style or reference format
• Incomplete reference information
• Using a reference inappropriately (eg, including a
reference that does not accurately support the
statement being made)
• Using outdated references and/or ignoring
landmark studies
• Using too many or too few references
• Using inappropriate references for biomedical
journals (eg, Wikipedia, magazines, etc)
References………
Use the format
advised by the
journal
Use a reference
manager software
program

20. Tables………
Common errors:
• Location is not identified in the text where
the table should be placed
• Include abbreviations without a legend
• Do not present data (eg, are lists of items)
• Authors do not submit appropriate
permissions to
• republish a table that has been published
previously

21. Common errors:
• Locations are not identified in the text where the figures should be
placed
• Figures are embedded in the manuscript file
• Legends and picture captions are missing at the end of the text
• Legends are built in to the image as part of a software package
• Figures are of poor quality or low dots per inch
• Graphs have multiple colours that, once converted to grayscale for
printing, look similar; and the reader cannot decipher which bar
represents the corresponding data
• Not formatted as per the journal instructions for authors
• Contain personal protected information
• Lack appropriate permissions for use of previously
• published images or model release forms
Figures………

22. • If we must put one item at the top of our wish list when it
comes to publications, it is a request for you to please read the
most current instructions for authors. The instructions for
authors will typically answer most, if not all, of your questions
that relate to the submissions process.
• We are pleased, and sometimes become a little giddy, when
we receive a well-delivered, properly formatted manuscript.
Editor speak………

23. Rejection is not the end of the
world.
Keep improving with every
rejection and resubmit till it gets
accepted.
Do not give up!
Thank you!