Browsed by
Tag: American revolutionary war essay

Writing the Method Section of a Medical Examine by Richard Kallet with minor modification

Writing the Method Section of a Medical Examine by Richard Kallet with minor modification

Summary
The methods section of a research paper provides the information by which a study’s validity is judged.Therefore, it requires a clear and precise description of how an experiment was done, and the rationale for why specific experimental procedures were chosen. The methods section should describe what was done to reaction the research question, describe how it was done, justify the experimental design, and explain how the results were analyzed. Scientific writing is direct and orderly. Therefore, the methods section structure should: describe the materials used in the explore, explain how the materials were ready for the probe, describe the research protocol, explain how measurements were made and what calculations were performed, and state which statistical tests were done to analyze the data. Once all elements of the methods section are written, subsequent
drafts should concentrate on how to present those elements as clearly and logically as possibly. The
description of preparations, measurements, and the protocol should be organized chronologically.
For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be introduced, information should be introduced in sub-sections according to topic. Material in each section should be organized by topic from most to least significant.

The methods section is the most significant aspect of a research paper because it provides the information by which the validity of a explore is ultimately judged. Therefore, the author must provide a clear and precise description of how an experiment was done, and the rationale for the specific
experimental procedures chosen. It must be written with enough information so that:

(1) the experiment could be repeated by others to evaluate whether the results are reproducible,

(Two) the audience can judge whether the results and conclusions are valid.

Basic Research Concepts

The scientific method attempts to detect cause-and effect relationships inbetween objects (ie, physical matter or processes). In the physical sciences objects are regarded as variables, and a variable is anything that can assume different values. Elucidating a cause-and-effect relationship
inbetween objects requires that variables are classified as independent, dependent, or confounding. An independent variable is one that, when manipulated, causes a switch in another variable. The variable that switches in response to that manipulation is referred to as a dependent variable.
For example, intraocular pressure is a dependent variable that responds to manipulations in independent variables such as blood pressure and pupil size. A confounding or extraneous variable is anything other than the independent variable of interest that may affect the dependent variable. Therefore, a switch in a dependent variable may be due wholly or in part to a switch in a confounding variable. For example, a switch in vena cava pressure can alter intraocular pressure by its effect upon ocular blood drainage.

Evaluation of a potential cause-effect relationship inbetween Two objects is accomplished through the development of the investigate design. A explore design is simply a strategy to control and manipulate variables that provide an reaction to the research question regarding potential cause-and-effect
relationships.

Validity refers to the credibility of experimental results and the degree to which the results can be applied to the general population of interest. Internal validity refers to the credibility of a examine and is determined by the degree to which conclusions drawn from an experiment correctly describe what actually transpired during the explore. 1 Outward validity refers to whether (and to what degree) the results of a explore can be generalized to a larger population. 1 Unluckily, all biological systems are profoundly elaborate, so elementary, unambiguous, direct relationships inbetween objects can be difficult to ascertain. The internal validity of a explore is judged by the degree to which its outcomes can be attributed to manipulation of independent variables and not to the effects of confounding variables. Therefore, the investigate protocol must be designed to control (eg, to keep constant) as many extraneous factors as possible so that any potential cause-and-effect relationship inbetween Two objects can be judged accurately. It is importantto emphasize that confounding variables can never be fully managed. Furthermore, the influence of these variables may not be fully appreciated by those conducting the research. Outer validity is primarily determined by how subjects are selected to participate in a investigate and by the use of randomization procedures that limit potential bias in how subjects are assigned to treatment groups.

Content and Writing Style of the Methods Section

Historically, the methods section was referred to as the “materials and methods” to emphasize the Two distinct areas that must be addressed. “Materials” referred to what was examined (eg, humans, animals, tissue preparations) and also to the various treatments (eg, drugs, gases) and instruments
(eg, ventilators) used in the probe. “Methods” referred to how subjects or objects were manipulated to response the experimental question, how measurements and calculations were made, and how the data were analyzed.

The complexity of scientific inquiry necessitates that the writing of the methods be clear and orderly to avoid confusion and ambiguity. Very first. it is usually helpful to structure the methods section by:

1. Describing the materials used in the examine

Two. Explaining how the materials were ready

Three. Describing the research protocol

Four. Explaining how measurements were made and what calculations were performed

Five. Stating which statistical tests were done to analyze the data Two

2nd. the writing should be direct and precise and in the past tense. Compound sentence structures should be avoided, as well as descriptions of unimportant details. Once all elements of the methods section are written down during the initial draft, subsequent drafts should concentrate on
how to present those elements as clearly and logically as possibly. In general, the description of preparations, measurements, and the protocol should be organized chronologically. For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be introduced, information should be introduced in subsections according to topic. Within each section and subsection, material should always be organized by topic from most to least significant.

Judging the outward validity of a probe involving human subjects (ie, to whom the probe results may be applied) requires that descriptive data be provided regarding the basic demographic profile of the sample population, including age, gender, and possibly the racial composition of the sample. When animals are the subjects of a investigate, it is significant to list species, weight, strain, hookup, and age.

Who is chosen for inclusion in a investigate (as well as how treatments are assigned) in large measure determines what boundaries are placed on the generalizations that can be made regarding the examine results. Thus, when writing the methods section, it is significant to describe who the subjects were in the context of the research question. The selection criteria and rationale for enrolling patients into the explore must be stated explicitly. For example, if the examine proclaims to examine whether latanoprost reduces post-phacoemulsification intraocular pressure, then one would not anticipate that patients with combined trabeculectomy and phacoemulsifcation to be included. In addition, it is significant when describing patients to provide some evaluation of their health status that is relevant to the probe.

When working with human or animal subjects, there must be a declaration that the medical center’s institutional review board governing research on living matter has determined that the probe protocol adheres to ethical principles. Without such approval, no research project can be conducted nor can it be published in a reputable, peerreview science journal.

In studies involving animal models or mechanical models, a detailed description must be provided regarding the preparations made prior to beginning the experimental protocol. In studies involving animals a detailed description should be provided on the use of sedation and anesthesia, the route of administration, and how its efficacy was evaluated. Two In addition, all aspects of animal or tissue prep required prior to initiation of the research protocol must be described in detail. With any animal prep or mechanical model there must be enough detail provided so that the reader can duplicate it or evaluate its relevance. When a probe involves the use or evaluation of drugs, the generic drug name should be used and the manufacturer, concentration, dose, and infusion rate should be specified. Likewise, when medical gases are used, the concentration and flow rates should be specified.

It is worth noting that the introduction of any novel method for measuring a variable, or preparing /designing a model will require intense discussion. Depending on how unique (or unorthodox) the fresh method is, its validation most likely should be established in a separate publication, published prior to subjugation of the main examine.

The research protocol is the sequence of manipulations and measurement procedures that make up the experiment. Its description should go after the exact sequence of how the procedures were executed. Two Typically, this very first involves a description of baseline conditions and any associated
baseline measurements, followed by the sequence of manipulations of the independent variable and the subsequent measurement of switches in the dependent variable. It is also significant to describe all relevant aspects of clinical management not managed by the protocol in the peri-experimental period.

When writing the methods section, it is significant to bear in mind that the rationale or assumptions on which some procedures are based may not always be visible to the audience. This is particularly true when writing for a general medical audience, as opposed to members of a subspecialty. Therefore, the writer must always keep in mind who his/her audience is. The rationale and assumptions on which experimental procedures are based should be shortly stated in the methods section and, if necessary, described in more detail in the discussion section. Whenever it is not visible, the purpose of a procedure should be stated in relationship either to the research question or to the entire protocol. Writing the methods section in this style is called a purpose-procedure format. Two

Measurements and Calculations

The next step in the methods section is to describe what variables were measured and how those measurements were made. The description of measurement instruments should include the manufacturer and model, calibration procedures, and how measurements were made. It also may be necessary to justify why and how certain variables were measured. This becomes particularly significant when the object of the experiment can be approached only indirectly. Tangentially, whenever a value for a variable is used to indicate a state or condition, this should be stated explicitly. For example, one could state: “Adequate intraocular pressure control was indicated by a pressure of < 21 mm Hg.” A listing of all calculations used in the explore typically goes after the description of measurements.

The last step in the methods section is to describe how the data will be introduced in the results section (eg, mean vs median), which statistical tests will used for the infer-ential data, and what p value is deemed to indicate a statistically significant difference.

The methods section is the most significant part of a research paper because it provides the information the reader needs to judge the study’s validity. Providing a clear and precise description of how an experiment was done, and the rationale for specific experimental procedures are crucial aspects of scientific writing.

1. Hulley SB, Newman TB, Cummings SR. The anatomy and physiology of research.
In: Hulley SB, Cummings SR (editors). Designing clinical research. Baltimore: William &
Wilkins; 1988:1–11.

Two. Zeiger M. Essentials of writing biomedical research papers. Fresh York: McGraw-Hill;
1991:113–138.

Writing the Method Section of a Medical Explore
by Richard Kallet with minor modification

Summary
The methods section of a research paper provides the information by which a study’s validity is judged.Therefore, it requires a clear and precise description of how an experiment was done, and the rationale for why specific experimental procedures were chosen. The methods section should describe what was done to response the research question, describe how it was done, justify the experimental design, and explain how the results were analyzed. Scientific writing is direct and orderly. Therefore, the methods section structure should: describe the materials used in the explore, explain how the materials were ready for the probe, describe the research protocol, explain how measurements were made and what calculations were performed, and state which statistical tests were done to analyze the data. Once all elements of the methods section are written, subsequent
drafts should concentrate on how to present those elements as clearly and logically as possibly. The
description of preparations, measurements, and the protocol should be organized chronologically.
For clarity, when a large amount of detail must be introduced, information should be introduced in sub-sections according to topic. Material in each section should be organized by topic from most to least significant.

Related video: The author’s purpose for writing (1/3) | Interpreting Series