original papers in research

• SpringerLink shop

Types of journal articles

It is helpful to familiarise yourself with the different types of articles published by journals. Although it may appear there are a large number of types of articles published due to the wide variety of names they are published under, most articles published are one of the following types; Original Research, Review Articles, Short reports or Letters, Case Studies, Methodologies.

Original Research:

This is the most common type of journal manuscript used to publish full reports of data from research. It may be called an  Original Article, Research Article, Research, or just  Article, depending on the journal. The Original Research format is suitable for many different fields and different types of studies. It includes full Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion sections.

Short reports or Letters:

These papers communicate brief reports of data from original research that editors believe will be interesting to many researchers, and that will likely stimulate further research in the field. As they are relatively short the format is useful for scientists with results that are time sensitive (for example, those in highly competitive or quickly-changing disciplines). This format often has strict length limits, so some experimental details may not be published until the authors write a full Original Research manuscript. These papers are also sometimes called Brief communications .

Review Articles:

Review Articles provide a comprehensive summary of research on a certain topic, and a perspective on the state of the field and where it is heading. They are often written by leaders in a particular discipline after invitation from the editors of a journal. Reviews are often widely read (for example, by researchers looking for a full introduction to a field) and highly cited. Reviews commonly cite approximately 100 primary research articles.

TIP: If you would like to write a Review but have not been invited by a journal, be sure to check the journal website as some journals to not consider unsolicited Reviews. If the website does not mention whether Reviews are commissioned it is wise to send a pre-submission enquiry letter to the journal editor to propose your Review manuscript before you spend time writing it.  

Case Studies:

These articles report specific instances of interesting phenomena. A goal of Case Studies is to make other researchers aware of the possibility that a specific phenomenon might occur. This type of study is often used in medicine to report the occurrence of previously unknown or emerging pathologies.

Methodologies or Methods

These articles present a new experimental method, test or procedure. The method described may either be completely new, or may offer a better version of an existing method. The article should describe a demonstrable advance on what is currently available.

Back │ Next

• Enroll & Pay
• Prospective Students
• Current Students
• Degree Programs

Original Research

An original research paper should present a unique argument of your own. In other words, the claim of the paper should be debatable and should be your (the researcher’s) own original idea. Typically an original research paper builds on the existing research on a topic, addresses a specific question, presents the findings according to a standard structure (described below), and suggests questions for further research and investigation. Though writers in any discipline may conduct original research, scientists and social scientists in particular are interested in controlled investigation and inquiry. Their research often consists of direct and indirect observation in the laboratory or in the field. Many scientists write papers to investigate a hypothesis (a statement to be tested).

Although the precise order of research elements may vary somewhat according to the specific task, most include the following elements:

• Table of contents
• List of illustrations
• Body of the report
• References cited

Check your assignment for guidance on which formatting style is required. The Complete Discipline Listing Guide (Purdue OWL)  provides information on the most common style guide for each discipline, but be sure to check with your instructor.

The title of your work is important. It draws the reader to your text. A common practice for titles is to use a two-phrase title where the first phrase is a broad reference to the topic to catch the reader’s attention. This phrase is followed by a more direct and specific explanation of your project. For example:

“Lions, Tigers, and Bears, Oh My!: The Effects of Large Predators on Livestock Yields.”

The first phrase draws the reader in – it is creative and interesting. The second part of the title tells the reader the specific focus of the research.

In addition, data base retrieval systems often work with  keywords  extracted from the title or from a list the author supplies. When possible, incorporate them into the title. Select these words with consideration of how prospective readers might attempt to access your document. For more information on creating keywords, refer to this  Springer research publication guide.

See the KU Writing Center Writing Guide on Abstracts for detailed information about creating an abstract.

Table of Contents

The table of contents provides the reader with the outline and location of specific aspects of your document. Listings in the table of contents typically match the headings in the paper. Normally, authors number any pages before the table of contents as well as the lists of illustrations/tables/figures using lower-case roman numerals. As such, the table of contents will use lower-case roman numbers to identify the elements of the paper prior to the body of the report, appendix, and reference page. Additionally, because authors will normally use Arabic numerals (e.g., 1, 2, 3) to number the pages of the body of the research paper (starting with the introduction), the table of contents will use Arabic numerals to identify the main sections of the body of the paper (the introduction, literature review, methods, results, discussion, conclusion, references, and appendices).

Here is an example of a table of contents:

ABSTRACT..................................................iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS...............................iv

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS...........................v

LIST OF TABLES.........................................vii

INTRODUCTION..........................................1

LITERATURE REVIEW.................................6

METHODS....................................................9

RESULTS....................................................10

DISCUSSION..............................................16

CONCLUSION............................................18

REFERENCES............................................20

APPENDIX................................................. 23

More information on creating a table of contents can be found in the Table of Contents Guide (SHSU)  from the Newton Gresham Library at Sam Houston State University.

List of Illustrations

Authors typically include a list of the illustrations in the paper with longer documents. List the number (e.g., Illustration 4), title, and page number of each illustration under headings such as "List of Illustrations" or "List of Tables.”

Body of the Report

The tone of a report based on original research will be objective and formal, and the writing should be concise and direct. The structure will likely consist of these standard sections:  introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion . Typically, authors identify these sections with headings and may use subheadings to identify specific themes within these sections (such as themes within the literature under the literature review section).

Introduction

Given what the field says about this topic, here is my contribution to this line of inquiry.

The introduction often consists of the rational for the project. What is the phenomenon or event that inspired you to write about this topic? What is the relevance of the topic and why is it important to study it now? Your introduction should also give some general background on the topic – but this should not be a literature review. This is the place to give your readers and necessary background information on the history, current circumstances, or other qualities of your topic generally. In other words, what information will a layperson need to know in order to get a decent understanding of the purpose and results of your paper? Finally, offer a “road map” to your reader where you explain the general order of the remainder of your paper. In the road map, do not just list the sections of the paper that will follow. You should refer to the main points of each section, including the main arguments in the literature review, a few details about your methods, several main points from your results/analysis, the most important takeaways from your discussion section, and the most significant conclusion or topic for further research.   

Literature Review

This is what other researchers have published about this topic.

In the literature review, you will define and clarify the state of the topic by citing key literature that has laid the groundwork for this investigation. This review of the literature will identify relations, contradictions, gaps, and inconsistencies between previous investigations and this one, and suggest the next step in the investigation chain, which will be your hypothesis. You should write the literature review in the  present tense  because it is ongoing information.

Methods (Procedures)

This is how I collected and analyzed the information.

This section recounts the procedures of the study. You will write this in  past tense  because you have already completed the study. It must include what is necessary to replicate and validate the hypothesis. What details must the reader know in order to replicate this study? What were your purposes in this study? The challenge in this section is to understand the possible readers well enough to include what is necessary without going into detail on “common-knowledge” procedures. Be sure that you are specific enough about your research procedure that someone in your field could easily replicate your study. Finally, make sure not to report any findings in this section.

This is what I found out from my research.

This section reports the findings from your research. Because this section is about research that is completed, you should write it primarily in the  past tense . The form and level of detail of the results depends on the hypothesis and goals of this report, and the needs of your audience. Authors of research papers often use visuals in the results section, but the visuals should enhance, rather than serve as a substitute, for the narrative of your results. Develop a narrative based on the thesis of the paper and the themes in your results and use visuals to communicate key findings that address your hypothesis or help to answer your research question. Include any unusual findings that will clarify the data. It is a good idea to use subheadings to group the results section into themes to help the reader understand the main points or findings of the research. 

This is what the findings mean in this situation and in terms of the literature more broadly.

This section is your opportunity to explain the importance and implications of your research. What is the significance of this research in terms of the hypothesis? In terms of other studies? What are possible implications for any academic theories you utilized in the study? Are there any policy implications or suggestions that result from the study? Incorporate key studies introduced in the review of literature into your discussion along with your own data from the results section. The discussion section should put your research in conversation with previous research – now you are showing directly how your data complements or contradicts other researchers’ data and what the wider implications of your findings are for academia and society in general. What questions for future research do these findings suggest? Because it is ongoing information, you should write the discussion in the  present tense . Sometimes the results and discussion are combined; if so, be certain to give fair weight to both.

These are the key findings gained from this research.

Summarize the key findings of your research effort in this brief final section. This section should not introduce new information. You can also address any limitations from your research design and suggest further areas of research or possible projects you would complete with a new and improved research design.

References/Works Cited

See KU Writing Center  writing guides  to learn more about different citation styles like APA, MLA, and Chicago.  Make an appointment  at the KU Writing Center for more help. Be sure to format the paper and references based on the citation style that your professor requires or based on the requirements of the academic journal or conference where you hope to submit the paper.

The appendix includes attachments that are pertinent to the main document but are too detailed to be included in the main text. These materials should be titled and labeled (for example Appendix A: Questionnaire). You should refer to the appendix in the text with in-text references so the reader understands additional useful information is available elsewhere in the document. Examples of documents to include in the appendix include regression tables, tables of text analysis data, and interview questions.

Updated June 2022  

• Utility Menu

fa3d988da6f218669ec27d6b6019a0cd

A publication of the harvard college writing program.

Harvard Guide to Using Sources 

• The Honor Code

Writing "Original" Papers

Some of your writing assignments at Harvard will explicitly ask you to present an "original" thesis, claim, or idea. But even when the word "original" isn't mentioned, you should assume that your professor expects you to develop a thesis that is the product of your own thinking and not something drawn directly from a source. Occasionally an assignment will require only a summary of your reading, particularly if the instructor wants to make sure you have understood a particularly complex concept; however, some assignments may be worded in a way that leaves expectations ambiguous (you may be asked, for example, to "discuss" or "consider" a source), and you may think you are only expected to summarize when, in fact, you are expected to make an argument. When in doubt about whether you are supposed to make an argument in your paper, always check with your instructor to make sure you understand what you're expected to do.

The expectation that you will say something original in every college paper may seem daunting. After all, how can you, an undergraduate who has been studying a particular subject for as little as one semester, know enough to make an original contribution to a field that your professor may have spent a career studying? Indeed, it would be impossible for you to come up with an idea for every paper you write that no one has ever thought of before, and your instructors realize this. When they ask you to come up with an original idea, they may be signaling different expectations, depending on the context of the assignment. Below, you'll find a general framework for thinking about originality in different situations you will encounter in college.

Writing Situation #1: Short Non-Research Papers

In the context of certain assignments, it's enough to come up with a thesis that's original to you—a thesis that you arrived at after thinking about the material you read, rather than an idea you encountered in one of the assigned sources. This will be true for the papers you write in Expos, as well as for many of the short papers you write in your Gen Ed and concentration courses. For these papers, your instructor does not expect you to come up with an idea that no one else has ever written about. Instead, your instructor is most interested in your thought process, your analytical skills, and the way you explain why you think what you think. But why, you may be wondering, would anyone bother writing a paper that presents an idea that other scholars have written about already?

Here's the short answer to that question: There is real value in discovering an idea for yourself, selecting the best evidence to support it, and taking the necessary steps to argue for it. Taking these steps helps you learn both what you think about a topic or issue and how to think through a problem or set of problems. This kind of thinking is necessary preparation for the longer projects you'll do later in your college career when you will be expected to say something truly original. It's impossible to tackle those projects—from a senior thesis to original lab research—if you haven't had the experience of arriving at an idea, fleshing out an argument, and presenting it to an audience. This preparation will serve you well as your college coursework becomes more specialized, and it will also benefit you when you leave college. Whatever field you go into, you'll find yourself in situations where your analysis of a particular problem—and your use of sources to solve that problem—will be crucial to your success.

While the specifics of the assignments for short papers will vary, remember that whenever you're asked to make a claim, you're expected to do your own thinking. In other words, writing a paper about a claim that has been worked over in class, in section, or in your readings will not leave you room to do much thinking of your own. Nor will writing a paper about a claim that will strike your readers as obvious, simple, and unarguable. If you are interested in an idea that has come up in class, or one that seems obvious, you should work on extending or complicating this idea, or coming up with a counterargument that changes the way the idea should be considered. Also, keep in mind that when your instructors tell you not to consult outside sources, they are often doing so precisely to encourage your original thinking, and you should follow their instructions. When an assignment specifies that you avoid outside sources, you should generally take this to mean that you should not do any outside reading in preparation for the assignment.

Writing Situation #2: Short Research Papers and Term Papers

When you are assigned a research paper or term paper for a course, you will often be asked to write 10-20 pages in which you respond to sources you identify and locate yourself . As with the shorter papers you write for your courses, you will generally not be expected to come up with an idea that has never been considered before (although your instructors will certainly be pleased if you do). So how will you know if your idea is original enough?

The key to answering this question is to think carefully about the context of the course and to decide what's reasonable for you to do given the scope of the assignment. For example, if you've been asked to find five sources of your own, your paper will not be original enough if your argument simply echoes one of these sources, or if it echoes a source that was assigned in class. On the other hand, if you locate three sources, each of which offers different answers to the same question, your paper will be original if you can make your own argument for which answer makes the most sense and why.

Your argument will not, however, be original enough if you make the same argument as one of the sources without acknowledging why that source makes the strongest argument. For example, if you were writing about climate change and you were asked to read and consider an argument for investing in nuclear energy and an argument against investing in nuclear energy, you might agree with one of those arguments and present your argument for why it is the stronger idea. Or you might decide that both arguments fall short. You might decide that you support or oppose investing in nuclear energy for reasons other than those offered in the source’s argument. Or you might decide that the argument opposing nuclear energy misses a key factor. The result of doing your own thinking about the topic would be a paper that does not simply restate the position of one of your sources but, rather, uses those sources to inform your own thinking. And the process of writing that paper would have gotten you closer to figuring out what you think about the topic. When you are doing research, it's always a good idea to check in with your instructor to make sure that you are not overlooking important work in that field and that the sources you are choosing are significant and appropriate for your project.

Writing Situation #3: The Junior Tutorial and the Senior Thesis

When you write a substantial piece of work that takes a semester or more (like a junior tutorial paper or a senior thesis), the expectations for originality are different because of the length of the essay you'll write and because of your level of expertise in the field. As you gain experience in your concentration, your knowledge of the major ideas in your chosen field will expand, you will develop your ability to ask more rigorous questions in that field, and you will be able to answer those questions in ways that are original not just to you but to your readers. At this point in your college career, you'll have had the opportunity to learn who the major thinkers are in your field and how to identify the important literature on what research has taken place on your topic. You'll be able to find the most important current scholarship on a topic or the most recent findings related to your research question. Your expertise, along with the time you'll have to devote to the project, means that you will be well-equipped to say something original about your topic.

Even when you write these longer papers, it's still important to understand what it means to say something original. Academic work is very specialized, and scholars build theories and ideas based on the knowledge and ideas that they have studied. In practical terms, this means that ideas evolve slowly, and every original idea doesn't have to be E=mc2 or Kierkegaard's "leap of faith." While there's nothing wrong with hoping to discover a new element to add to the periodic table or trying to figure out the true identity of Shakespeare, it's more likely that your ideas will be original in any of the following ways.

You might discover, in your study of a particular topic, that no one has considered a question or problem that interests you. Or you might bring new information or a new perspective to a question that others have asked. For example, you might look at newly released government documents to consider a question about how the Reagan administration shaped economic policies. While the question may have been asked before, the newly available data will allow you to provide a fresh, original perspective. Similarly, while many people have written about Shakespeare’s plays, you might find that comparing a new production to a more traditional version would bring you a fresh perspective on the play.

Sometimes collecting and analyzing your own data will provide an original take on a topic. For example, if you were writing a senior thesis in a lab science or social science concentration, you might collect and analyze your own data in pursuit of an answer to a question that other scholars have attempted to answer before with different types of data. In psychology, for example, you might conduct an experiment under the supervision of a professor and then analyze your data. In a sociology or anthropology course, you might conduct a series of interviews and analyze them in order to answer a question in a new way.

As appealing as it might seem to discover an entirely new idea, it's just as valuable to add a new step or a new way of thinking to an idea that someone else has already presented. It's also valuable—and original—to consider ideas in relation to each other that have not been considered or connected to each other in this way before.

Whether you're working on a short assignment or a semester-long project, remember that even in the context of all the thinking that has come before yours, you are always capable of bringing your own unique point of view to a paper. In fact, you're doing your own thinking all the time, long before you start writing—in class discussion, in the dining hall, and in your instructor's office hours. When you bring sources into the equation, you're able to go beyond your gut reactions and feelings ("capitalism is good" or “capitalism is bad”) to develop more nuanced ideas ("capitalism does a better job of creating incentives for innovation than other systems" or "a capitalist society cannot protect the most vulnerable"). Sources also introduce you to competing arguments and interpretations and help to lay the groundwork for your own thinking. When you read what has already been written on a particular topic, or when you analyze data that has already been produced in addition to new data, you become more qualified to contribute to the conversation.

Many students tackling college-level writing for the first time find the expectations of college writing new and difficult. There are resources to help you as you embark on your writing assignments at Harvard, and you should feel free to make use of them. Writing Center tutors , Departmental Writing Fellows , and House tutors are all excellent resources. The Harvard Writing Project publishes a number of guides to writing in different fields, and the Writing Center offers general writing resources in addition to individual conferences.

Before you can use sources effectively, you need to know how to locate them, how to know if they are reliable, and how to distinguish clearly between the ideas in a source and your own ideas. The information on this site provides an introduction to the research process, including how and where to find sources , how to decide if a source is reliable and useful , how to use sources accurately and effectively in your papers both to strengthen your own thinking and writing and to avoid plagiarism, and finally, how to integrate source material into your writing and how to cite sources responsibly .

What Does It Mean to Be Controversial?

Most of your college writing assignments will instruct you to take a position or to make an argument. While it's important to learn how to weigh the evidence and draw conclusions that may be different from those of other scholars, it's also important to remember that in academic writing, the most controversial position isn't necessarily the strongest one to take. It might be tempting to manufacture a controversial argument by over-generalizing or caricaturing the ideas you oppose, but ultimately this kind of argument will be neither convincing nor interesting. Any argument you make should be the result of careful thought, and it should follow from a fair reading of the evidence available to you.

Consider, for example, an essay that Aishani Aatresh wrote for her ESPP class, Technology, Environment, and Society. In the paper, Aatresh tries to answer the question of why hydrogen-powered vehicles have not been as successful as electric vehicles in the United States. While it would have sounded most controversial to argue something like “hydrogen-powered vehicles will always be too dangerous because hydrogen is so flammable,” or “hydrogen-powered vehicles are inferior to electric vehicles in every way,” Aatresh’s research suggested that this type of statement would oversimplify a complex situation. She ended up with a thesis that is still controversial in the sense that readers may disagree with it, but one that does not depend on over-simplifying the issues at stake.

Here is the thesis statement she drafted:

Instead of being a contest of modes of sustainability or “superior” technology, FCEVs largely fit into familiar modes of movement while EVs represent elite, material, and innovative “progress” and thus are differentially situated in American society based on how these visions relate to the idea of independence.

With this thesis statement, Aatresh was able to use the evidence that she uncovered to take a position on a controversial topic (alternative fuels) that was both nuanced and arguable.

• What Are You Supposed to Do with Sources?
• Writing "Original" Papers
• Using Sources Beyond Harvard

PDFs for this Section

• Why Use Sources

• Main Library
• Digital Fabrication Lab
• Data Visualization Lab
• Business Learning Center
• Klai Juba Wald Architectural Studies Library
• NDSU Nursing at Sanford Health Library
• Research Assistance
• Special Collections
• Digital Collections
• Collection Development Policy
• Course Reserves
• Request Library Instruction
• Main Library Services
• Alumni & Community
• Academic Support Services in the Library
• Libraries Resources for Employees
• Book Equipment or Study Rooms
• Librarians by Academic Subject
• Germans from Russia Heritage Collection
• NDSU Archives
• Mission, Vision, and Strategic Plan 2022-2024
• Staff Directory
• Floor Plans
• The Libraries Magazine
• Accommodations for People with Disabilities
• Annual Report
• Donate to the Libraries
• Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
• Faculty Senate Library Committee
• Undergraduate Research Award

What is an original research article?

An original research article is a report of research activity that is written by the researchers who conducted the research or experiment. Original research articles may also be referred to as: “primary research articles” or “primary scientific literature.” In science courses, instructors may also refer to these as “peer-reviewed articles” or “refereed articles.”

Original research articles in the sciences have a specific purpose, follow a scientific article format, are peer reviewed, and published in academic journals.

Identifying Original Research: What to Look For

An "original research article" is an article that is reporting original research about new data or theories that have not been previously published. That might be the results of new experiments, or newly derived models or simulations. The article will include a detailed description of the methods used to produce them, so that other researchers can verify them. This description is often found in a section called "methods" or "materials and methods" or similar. Similarly, the results will generally be described in great detail, often in a section called "results."

Since the original research article is reporting the results of new research, the authors should be the scientists who conducted that research. They will have expertise in the field, and will usually be employed by a university or research lab.

In comparison, a newspaper or magazine article (such as in  The New York Times  or  National Geographic ) will usually be written by a journalist reporting on the actions of someone else.

An original research article will be written by and for scientists who study related topics. As such, the article should use precise, technical language to ensure that other researchers have an exact understanding of what was done, how to do it, and why it matters. There will be plentiful citations to previous work, helping place the research article in a broader context. The article will be published in an academic journal, follow a scientific format, and undergo peer-review.

Original research articles in the sciences follow the scientific format. ( This tutorial from North Carolina State University illustrates some of the key features of this format.)

Look for signs of this format in the subject headings or subsections of the article. You should see the following:

Scientific research that is published in academic journals undergoes a process called "peer review."

The peer review process goes like this:

• A researcher writes a paper and sends it in to an academic journal, where it is read by an editor
• The editor then sends the article to other scientists who study similar topics, who can best evaluate the article
• The scientists/reviewers examine the article's research methodology, reasoning, originality, and sginificance
• The scientists/reviewers then make suggestions and comments to impove the paper
• The original author is then given these suggestions and comments, and makes changes as needed
• This process repeats until everyone is satisfied and the article can be published within the academic journal

For more details about this process see the Peer Reviewed Publications guide.

This journal article  is an example. It was published in the journal  Royal Society Open Science  in 2015. Clicking on the button that says "Review History" will show the comments by the editors, reviewers and the author as it went through the peer review process. The "About Us" menu provides details about this journal; "About the journal" under that tab includes the statement that the journal is peer reviewed.

Review articles

There are a variety of article types published in academic, peer-reviewed journals, but the two most common are original research articles and review articles . They can look very similar, but have different purposes and structures.

Like original research articles, review articles are aimed at scientists and undergo peer-review. Review articles often even have “abstract,” “introduction,” and “reference” sections. However, they will not (generally) have a “methods” or “results” section because they are not reporting new data or theories. Instead, they review the current state of knowledge on a topic.

Press releases, newspaper or magazine articles

These won't be in a formal scientific format or be peer reviewed. The author will usually be a journalist, and the audience will be the general public. Since most readers are not interested in the precise details of the research, the language will usually be nontechnical and broad. Citations will be rare or nonexistent.

Tips for Finding Original research Articles

Search for articles in one of the library databases recommend for your subject area . If you are using Google, try searching in Google Scholar instead and you will get results that are more likely to be original research articles than what will come up in a regular Google search!

For tips on using library databases to find articles, see our Library DIY guides .

Tips for Finding the Source of a News Report about Science

If you've seen or heard a report about a new scientific finding or claim, these tips can help you find the original source:

• Often, the report will mention where the original research was published; look for sentences like "In an article published yesterday in the journal  Nature ..." You can use this to find the issue of the journal where the research was published, and look at the table of contents to find the original article.
• The report will often name the researchers involved. You can search relevant databases for their name and the topic of the report to find the original research that way.
• Sometimes you may have to go through multiple articles to find the original source. For example, a video or blog post may be based on a newspaper article, which in turn is reporting on a scientific discovery published in another journal; be sure to find the original research article.
• Don't be afraid to ask a librarian for help!

Search The Site

Find Your Librarian  

Phone:  Circulation:  (701) 231-8888 Reference:  (701) 231-8888 Administration:  (701) 231-8753

Email:  Administration InterLibrary Loan (ILL)

• Online Services
• Phone/Email Directory
• Registration And Records
• Government Information
• Library DIY
• Subject and Course Guides
• Special Topics
• Collection Highlights
• Digital Horizons
• NDSU Repository (IR)
• Libraries Hours
• News & Events

Research articles

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy as first line treatment for advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, epidural analgesia during labour and severe maternal morbidity, exposure to antibiotics during pregnancy or early infancy and risk of neurodevelopmental disorders, clinical and healthcare use outcomes after cessation of long term opioid treatment due to prescriber workforce exit, effect of the hpv vaccination programme on incidence of cervical cancer by socioeconomic deprivation in england, long acting progestogens vs combined oral contraceptive pill for preventing recurrence of endometriosis related pain, ultra-processed food consumption and all cause and cause specific mortality, comparative effectiveness of second line oral antidiabetic treatments among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus, efficacy of psilocybin for treating symptoms of depression, reverse total shoulder replacement versus anatomical total shoulder replacement for osteoarthritis, effect of combination treatment with glp-1 receptor agonists and sglt-2 inhibitors on incidence of cardiovascular and serious renal events, prenatal opioid exposure and risk of neuropsychiatric disorders in children, temporal trends in lifetime risks of atrial fibrillation and its complications, antipsychotic use in people with dementia, predicting the risks of kidney failure and death in adults with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease, impact of large scale, multicomponent intervention to reduce proton pump inhibitor overuse, esketamine after childbirth for mothers with prenatal depression, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist use and risk of thyroid cancer, use of progestogens and the risk of intracranial meningioma, delirium and incident dementia in hospital patients, derivation and external validation of a simple risk score for predicting severe acute kidney injury after intravenous cisplatin, quality and safety of artificial intelligence generated health information, large language models and the generation of health disinformation, 25 year trends in cancer incidence and mortality among adults in the uk, cervical pessary versus vaginal progesterone in women with a singleton pregnancy, comparison of prior authorization across insurers, diagnostic accuracy of magnetically guided capsule endoscopy with a detachable string for detecting oesophagogastric varices in adults with cirrhosis, ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes, added benefit and revenues of oncology drugs approved by the ema, exposure to air pollution and hospital admission for cardiovascular diseases, short term exposure to low level ambient fine particulate matter and natural cause, cardiovascular, and respiratory morbidity, optimal timing of influenza vaccination in young children, effect of exercise for depression, association of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease with cardiovascular disease and all cause death in patients with type 2 diabetes, duration of cpr and outcomes for adults with in-hospital cardiac arrest, clinical effectiveness of an online physical and mental health rehabilitation programme for post-covid-19 condition, atypia detected during breast screening and subsequent development of cancer, publishers’ and journals’ instructions to authors on use of generative ai in academic and scientific publishing, effectiveness of glp-1 receptor agonists on glycaemic control, body weight, and lipid profile for type 2 diabetes, neurological development in children born moderately or late preterm, invasive breast cancer and breast cancer death after non-screen detected ductal carcinoma in situ, all cause and cause specific mortality in obsessive-compulsive disorder, acute rehabilitation following traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation, perinatal depression and risk of mortality, undisclosed financial conflicts of interest in dsm-5-tr, effect of risk mitigation guidance opioid and stimulant dispensations on mortality and acute care visits, update to living systematic review on sars-cov-2 positivity in offspring and timing of mother-to-child transmission, perinatal depression and its health impact, christmas 2023: common healthcare related instruments subjected to magnetic attraction study, using autoregressive integrated moving average models for time series analysis of observational data, demand for morning after pill following new year holiday, christmas 2023: christmas recipes from the great british bake off, effect of a doctor working during the festive period on population health: experiment using doctor who episodes, christmas 2023: analysis of barbie medical and science career dolls, christmas 2023: effect of chair placement on physicians’ behavior and patients’ satisfaction, management of chronic pain secondary to temporomandibular disorders, christmas 2023: projecting complete redaction of clinical trial protocols, christmas 2023: a drug target for erectile dysfunction to help improve fertility, sexual activity, and wellbeing, christmas 2023: efficacy of cola ingestion for oesophageal food bolus impaction, conservative management versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy in adults with gallstone disease, social media use and health risk behaviours in young people, untreated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and cervical cancer, air pollution deaths attributable to fossil fuels, implementation of a high sensitivity cardiac troponin i assay and risk of myocardial infarction or death at five years, covid-19 vaccine effectiveness against post-covid-19 condition, association between patient-surgeon gender concordance and mortality after surgery, intravascular imaging guided versus coronary angiography guided percutaneous coronary intervention, treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms in men in primary care using a conservative intervention, autism intervention meta-analysis of early childhood studies, effectiveness of the live zoster vaccine during the 10 years following vaccination, effects of a multimodal intervention in primary care to reduce second line antibiotic prescriptions for urinary tract infections in women, pyrotinib versus placebo in combination with trastuzumab and docetaxel in patients with her2 positive metastatic breast cancer, association of dcis size and margin status with risk of developing breast cancer post-treatment, racial differences in low value care among older patients in the us, pharmaceutical industry payments and delivery of low value cancer drugs, rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin in adults with coronary artery disease, clinical effectiveness of septoplasty versus medical management for nasal airways obstruction, ultrasound guided lavage with corticosteroid injection versus sham lavage with and without corticosteroid injection for calcific tendinopathy of shoulder, early versus delayed antihypertensive treatment in patients with acute ischaemic stroke, mortality risks associated with floods in 761 communities worldwide, interactive effects of ambient fine particulate matter and ozone on daily mortality in 372 cities, association between changes in carbohydrate intake and long term weight changes, future-case control crossover analysis for adjusting bias in case crossover studies, association between recently raised anticholinergic burden and risk of acute cardiovascular events, suboptimal gestational weight gain and neonatal outcomes in low and middle income countries: individual participant data meta-analysis, efficacy and safety of an inactivated virus-particle vaccine for sars-cov-2, effect of invitation letter in language of origin on screening attendance: randomised controlled trial in breastscreen norway, visits by nurse practitioners and physician assistants in the usa, non-erosive gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and oesophageal adenocarcinoma, venous thromboembolism with use of hormonal contraception and nsaids, food additive emulsifiers and risk of cardiovascular disease, balancing risks and benefits of cannabis use, promoting activity, independence, and stability in early dementia and mild cognitive impairment, effect of home cook interventions for salt reduction in china, cancer mortality after low dose exposure to ionising radiation, effect of a smartphone intervention among university students with unhealthy alcohol use, long term risk of death and readmission after hospital admission with covid-19 among older adults, mortality rates among patients successfully treated for hepatitis c, association between antenatal corticosteroids and risk of serious infection in children, follow us on, content links.

• Collections
• Health in South Asia
• Women’s, children’s & adolescents’ health
• News and views
• BMJ Opinion
• Rapid responses
• Editorial staff
• BMJ in the USA
• BMJ in South Asia
• Submit your paper
• BMA members
• Subscribers
• Advertisers and sponsors

Explore BMJ

• Our company
• BMJ Careers
• BMJ Learning
• BMJ Masterclasses
• BMJ Journals
• BMJ Student
• Academic edition of The BMJ
• BMJ Best Practice
• The BMJ Awards
• Email alerts
• Activate subscription

Information

• Become Involved |
• Give to the Library |
• Staff Directory |
• UNF Library
• Thomas G. Carpenter Library

Original Research

How can i tell if the article is original research.

• Glossary of Terms
• What are Peer Reviewed/Refereed Articles?

Chat With Us Text Us (904) 507-4122   Email Us Schedule a Research Consultation

Visit us on social media!

What is Original Research?

Original research is considered a primary source.

An article is considered original research if...

• it is the report of a study written by the researchers who actually did the study.
• the researchers describe their hypothesis or research question and the purpose of the study.
• the researchers detail their research methods.
• the results of the research are reported.
• the researchers interpret their results and discuss possible implications.

There is no one way to easily tell if an article is a research article like there is for peer-reviewed articles in the Ulrich's database. The only way to be sure is to read the article to verify that it is written by the researchers and that they have explained all of their findings, in addition to listing their methodologies, results, and any conclusions based on the evidence collected. 

All that being said, there are a few key indicators that will help you to quickly decide whether or not your article is based on original research. 

• Literature Review or Background
• Conclusions
• Read through the abstract (summary) before you attempt to find the full-text PDF. The abstract of the article usually contains those subdivision headings where each of the key sections are summarized individually. 
• Use the checkbox with CINAHL's advanced search to only see articles that have been tagged as research articles.   
• Next: Glossary of Terms >>
• Last Updated: Feb 7, 2022 11:44 AM
• URL: https://libguides.unf.edu/originalresearch

Scientific Manuscript Writing: Original Research, Case Reports, Review Articles

• First Online: 02 March 2024

Cite this chapter

• Kimberly M. Rathbun 5  

15 Accesses

Manuscripts are used to communicate the findings of your work with other researchers. Writing your first manuscript can be a challenge. Journals provide guidelines to authors which should be followed closely. The three major types of articles (original research, case reports, and review articles) all generally follow the IMRAD format with slight variations in content. With planning and thought, manuscript writing does not have to be a daunting task.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Suggested Readings

Alsaywid BS, Abdulhaq NM. Guideline on writing a case report. Urol Ann. 2019;11(2):126–31.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cohen H. How to write a patient case report. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2006;63(19):1888–92.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Cooper ID. How to write an original research paper (and get it published). J Med Lib Assoc. 2015;103:67–8.

Article   Google Scholar  

Gemayel R. How to write a scientific paper. FEBS J. 2016;283(21):3882–5.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Gülpınar Ö, Güçlü AG. How to write a review article? Turk J Urol. 2013;39(Suppl 1):44–8.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Huth EJ. Structured abstracts for papers reporting clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 1987;106:626–7.

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. http://www.ICMJE.org . Accessed 23 Aug 2022.

Liumbruno GM, Velati C, Pasqualetti P, Franchini M. How to write a scientific manuscript for publication. Blood Transfus. 2013;11:217–26.

McCarthy LH, Reilly KE. How to write a case report. Fam Med. 2000;32(3):190–5.

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, McKenzie JE. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n160.

The Biosemantics Group. Journal/author name estimator. https://jane.biosemantics.org/ . Accessed 24 Aug 2022.

Weinstein R. How to write a manuscript for peer review. J Clin Apher. 2020;35(4):358–66.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Emergency Medicine, AU/UGA Medical Partnership, Athens, GA, USA

Kimberly M. Rathbun

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kimberly M. Rathbun .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Emergency Medicine, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, PA, USA

Robert P. Olympia

Elizabeth Barrall Werley

Jeffrey S. Lubin

MD Anderson Cancer Center at Cooper, Cooper Medical School of Rowan University, Camden, NJ, USA

Kahyun Yoon-Flannery

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Rathbun, K.M. (2023). Scientific Manuscript Writing: Original Research, Case Reports, Review Articles. In: Olympia, R.P., Werley, E.B., Lubin, J.S., Yoon-Flannery, K. (eds) An Emergency Physician’s Path. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47873-4_80

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47873-4_80

Published : 02 March 2024

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-47872-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-47873-4

eBook Packages : Medicine Medicine (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Peer reviewing an original research paper

Department of Pediatrics, Seth G.S. Medical College and KEM Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

In our earlier editorials on research and medical writing, we have discussed the importance of research; we have given a roadmap for drafting an original research article and have also provided suggestions on how to publish research papers successfully.[ 1 , 2 , 3 ] In this editorial, we discuss the process of peer review and method for writing good reviews for original research papers. The authors, reviewers, and editors form the vital links in the process of publication and scientific communication and hence they need to understand their roles and “shared” responsibilities in this process.[ 4 , 5 ] The authors need to ensure that they adhere to good science and ethics while the reviewers need to be meticulous, unbiased, sincere, supportive, and constructive while giving their reviews.[ 4 , 5 ] The editors need to be unbiased and disciplined and follow best practices while handling the manuscripts received by the journal.[ 4 ]

The editors do largely depend on the opinions given by the reviewers of a manuscript while making critical decisions, though they are not obligated to do so.[ 4 , 6 , 7 ] Peer review is primarily the assessment/evaluation of research by an expert in a particular field.[ 4 ] It is a critical component of the publication process and helps to maintain a high quality of published research.[ 4 , 6 , 7 ] With the explosion in the number of scientific biomedical journals and the large numbers of manuscripts submitted for publication, identifying appropriate reviewers, and retaining their services has become increasingly difficult for the journals. Prestigious indices such as the Index Medicus/PubMed and Scopus necessitate that the journals indexed with them follow a proper peer review process.[ 4 ] It is better to use the term “assessor” or “reviewer” instead of the older term “referee” as the final decision regarding a manuscript has to be taken by the editor and not the reviewer.[ 7 ]

This has been given elaborately in our earlier editorial on success in publishing a paper.[ 3 ] Once a paper is submitted on the website of a journal, the editor/subeditor checks the paper for completeness and adherence to their journal style. Permission from the Institutional Ethics Committee and compliance with appropriate informed consent/assent are checked. The paper is then circulated through some of the editorial board members for an “internal review” regarding the relevance, ethics, and methodology. The editorial board members submit their opinion (with relevant explanation) on whether the manuscript is worth processing for a formal peer review. The manuscript may be rejected at this stage if it is not suitable for the readership of the particular journal or if it has glaring ethical/methodological faults.[ 5 ] Only after passing the “internal review” process successfully, the manuscript is sent for an “external review” to the peer reviewers.

The editor/subeditor usually invites (usually by email) three to five experts in the field of the research paper to review the manuscript.[ 4 , 7 , 5 ] More reviewers get invited if some of these initial reviewers decline to review. On acceptance of the assignment, the reviewers are usually given about 4 weeks to perform the peer review. At times, however, the editor may ask for a rapid/fast review.[ 7 ] The manuscript management system can send automatic reminders to the reviewers.[ 7 ] The reviewers upload their comments to the authors and editors separately through the manuscript management system, with a confidential recommendation on acceptance/rejection/revision of the manuscript (this recommendation is sent to the editor only). The authors and reviewers are usually blinded to each other. Based on the reviews received and his/her own assessment of the manuscript, the editor/subeditor then takes a decision whether to reject the manuscript or invite a revision (minor/major revision) from the authors and the authors are informed accordingly. If a revision is invited, the authors are asked to give point-by-point reply to each of the reviewer's comments and to state the exact location in the (revised) manuscript text where the change has been incorporated (by underlining/highlighting the relevant changes or by colouring the revised text font).

Depending on the nature of the comments offered by the reviewers, the editor may take a decision whether to send the revised manuscript back to the original reviewers for their opinion (for deciding the adequacy of the revisions made by the authors). Most often the editors do send the revised manuscript back to the original reviewers for a rereview. At this stage, the reviewers can view the comments offered by the other reviewers, so that they can understand why particular changes have been made in the manuscript, which they did not advise for (and this helps as a learning tool for the reviewers as well).[ 6 ] The reviewers are requested to give their opinion on the revised manuscript in a similar fashion as the first review with comments to the authors and the editors separately. This process may continue until the manuscript is either rejected or accepted (with the changes asked by the reviewers and editor/s).

The editor/s respects the recommendations given by most the reviewers but make the final decision on their own (this decision may, at times, be contradictory to reviewer recommendations). In case of a tie on recommendations from the reviewers, the editor/s or a member of the editorial board may take a decision after a re-evaluation of all the reviewer opinions or an additional reviewer may be roped in for help in making a final decision.[ 5 ] The final decision that is made (acceptance/rejection) is usually conveyed to all the concerned reviewers.[ 6 ] Occasionally the editor/s may invite additional reviewers in case of conflicting reviewer opinions/recommendations. Editor/s consult their statistical consulting editor/statistical reviewer for papers with unfamiliar/difficult to understand (“heavy”) statistics.[ 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 ] The editor may also invite one of the reviewers or subject experts to write an editorial commentary on the research paper which has thus been accepted for publication.

If the authors are unhappy with the editor's decision, they may represent their case back to the editor and if they are not satisfied with the same, they may approach the ombudsman/ombudsperson (a “neutral” person) appointed by the journal.[ 4 ] The ruling given by the ombudsman is honoured by the editor as well as the authors.[ 4 ] Some manuscript management systems prompt the authors to suggest preferred or nonpreferred reviewers while uploading their manuscript and authors can avail this facility.[ 4 , 5 , 7 , 8 , 10 ] However, it is not mandatory for the editor to necessarily choose the reviewers suggested by the authors.[ 4 , 5 , 8 ]

The “blinded” versus the “open” peer review

Most journals follow a “single-blinded” (authors are blinded to the names of reviewers) or “double-blinded” peer review process (where the authors and reviewers are unaware of each other's identity).[ 4 , 5 , 7 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ] The advantages of this “double-blinded” system include maintenance of confidentiality, likelihood of the reviewers giving an honest opinion/critique, protection of authors from their ideas getting stolen/plagiarized, and protection of junior reviewers from possible retribution from senior authors (since the identity of the junior reviewer is not known to the senior author/s).[ 4 , 7 , 11 , 12 ] The disadvantages are that the reviewers may provide a very rude/harsh or extremely critical review (lesser accountability arising out of the reviewer anonymity) and a dishonest reviewer may use the process for self-promotion or some other ulterior motive (like plagiarism of the author's idea/hypothesis).[ 4 , 7 , 11 ]

The “open” peer review system is where the authors and reviewers know each other's identity.[ 4 , 7 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ] The advantage of the “open” peer review system is better accountability (and hence civility and courteousness) of the reviewers.[ 7 , 10 , 11 ] However, the disadvantages are that the reviewers may provide either noncritical reviews or decline to review papers of authors known to them.[ 4 , 7 , 10 , 11 , 12 ] At times, even in a blinded review process, the reviewers can guess the names of the authors/author-group, especially if they are working in a particular (similar) restricted field of science.[ 4 , 7 , 11 , 14 ] Some journals may ask the reviewers to sign their reviews which are posted in the public domain for improving transparency.[ 7 , 12 ]

A reviewer must have published a reasonable number (at least 5) of original research papers in the past so that they are well aware of medical writing and the peer review process. The editor invites a scholar/academician who has published on the topic similar to the research paper (in hand) or an expert who is a well-known authority on the particular subject or one who has successfully reviewed for the journal in the past.[ 5 ] While registering as a reviewer on the manuscript management website, the reviewer is asked to give his/her area/s of expertise (“keywords”); this also helps the editor in choosing appropriate reviewers.[ 7 ] Most journals have a database of the potential reviewers for their own journal/consortium and the editor can select reviewers using “keywords”.[ 5 , 7 , 8 ] An interested researcher may send his/her curriculum vitae to particular journal/s and request for empanelment as a potential reviewer.[ 4 ] Being a reviewer is considered to be an honour, privilege, and duty of researchers/academicians and one should (usually) not refuse to review a paper if they have the expertise to do so and ensure that they can spare their time to complete the review.[ 4 , 7 ]

Reviewing is an unpaid/voluntary work used as a measure of academic esteem by universities and usually not rewarded with any money.[ 7 , 8 , 15 ] Most journals publish the names of those who have reviewed for their journal once a year as a tribute to the reviewer's services and may reward the reviewer by giving complimentary access to their journal/group of journals for a limited period of time.[ 7 , 11 , 15 ] On average, reviewers spend up to 5 h (median time used) to 9 h (mean time used) for each review and review regularly for about three to four journals.[ 7 , 11 ]

Most reviewers learn the review process by trial and error (i.e., self-taught).[ 5 , 8 , 15 ] Though no particular training is necessarily available for one to become a reviewer, training oneself using tutorials available on the manuscript management websites or journals websites or by attending workshops/editorial fellowships and reading literature/books on peer review, does help.[ 4 , 5 , 7 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 15 , 16 ] Some senior academicians may mentor their junior colleagues as well.[ 5 , 8 , 15 ]

A good reviewer provides a useful and timely review of the manuscript. Table 1 gives the attributes/characteristics of a good reviewer.[ 2 , 3 , 7 , 10 , 14 , 15 ]

Characteristics of a good reviewer[ 2 , 7 , 10 , 14 , 15 ]

Reviewing a paper is an academic privilege.[ 7 ] With authority, there exist great responsibilities that the reviewers should be ready for. Some of them are enlisted in Table 2 .[ 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 18 ]

Responsibilities of peer reviewer/s[ 4 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 18 ]

Peer review ensures that the research published in a journal has a good quality. This is probably the only method of identifying publishable research from numerous manuscripts received by a journal. The advantages and disadvantages of the peer review system are given in Table 3 [ 4 , 5 , 7 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 19 , 20 ] and Table 4 ,[ 4 , 5 , 7 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 20 , 21 , 22 ] respectively. Recently, there have been peer reviewer frauds/scams and rigged peer reviews i.e., authors creating fake email addresses and suggesting the same to editors as possible reviewers and reviewing their own manuscripts; fabricated reviews by agencies that help authors to write manuscripts and then selling them favourable reviews; and cyber fraud by hacking/manipulating the peer review computerized systems by unscrupulous authors posing as expert reviewers and reviewing their own manuscripts. This has led to the retraction of such papers by various journals.[ 12 , 14 , 16 , 21 ]

Advantages of the peer review system[ 4 , 5 , 7 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 17 , 19 , 20 ]

Disadvantages of the peer review system[ 4 , 5 , 7 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 16 , 20 – 22 ]

The reviewer should be acquainted with the instructions to authors and the readership of the journal that they are reviewing for. The reviewer is expected to give a separate set of comments to the authors and to the editor. The comments to the authors relate to the science and draft of the manuscript; while the comments to the editor are regarding the overall manuscript evaluation and recommendation on acceptance or otherwise (these “confidential” comments to the editor cannot be viewed by the authors).[ 5 ] The reviewer is expected to help the editor in making a decision on the suitability of the manuscript for publication and how a manuscript can be improved upon.[ 7 ] Unacceptable flaws related to ethics or methodology need to be identified by the reviewer (this is, at times, already done by the editor/editorial board members in their “internal review”).[ 7 , 15 ] The reviewer, hence, even if an expert at a given topic, needs to read more literature about the topic to decide about the originality and quality of the paper.[ 7 , 15 ] Occasionally, the reviewer may unearth misconducts such as duplicate publication or salami (splitting research to create multiple papers) publication or plagiarism in the process of reviewing the (current) literature.[ 7 , 15 ]

Comments to authors: It is advisable to start with a summary stating the essential crux of the paper.[ 7 , 8 ] This assures the editors and the authors that the paper has been read completely and understood by the reviewer. Then either list the concerns as “major” and “minor” concerns or proceed section-wise (that is from the title, abstract, introduction, etc. up to the references section) to give specific comments.[ 7 , 8 , 17 ] Table 5 gives a format of a checklist which will help the reviewers in giving a complete review for a research article.[ 2 , 3 , 5 , 8 , 9 , 11 , 15 , 17 , 18 , 23 ] Such a checklist also helps the reviewers and reminds them of the various items/aspects that they need to evaluate in a research article. Standardized checklists like the CONSORT (consolidated standards of reporting trials) and STROBE (strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology), which are available at www.equator-network.org and used by authors (to draft their manuscript), are usually mentioned in their instructions to authors by the journals and can also be used for assisting the reviewers.[ 2 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 13 ] Similar checklists/questionnaires are used by the journals as well, and the reviewers are asked to rate the manuscript based on the same.[ 5 ] It is a good idea to number the comments so that the authors can reply point-wise (should a revision be invited from the authors). The primary work of the reviewer is to assess the science and ethics of the manuscript. It is not mandatory to comment on the grammar or syntax as this is the work of the copyright editor/assistant; however, guidance on language is welcomed by the editors. Though there are no recommendations on the length of the reviewer's report, about 1.5 to 2 single-spaced pages are usually enough.[ 8 ] The “gatekeepers” of scientific communication (editors and reviewers) need to review the scientific/discipline-based content (the “screening” function) of a paper as well as look at improving the paper as a tool for written communication (the “improving” function).[ 19 ] Some reviewers may prefer to mark their comments on a pdf or word version of the submitted manuscript and upload the same for the authors viewing and revision.[ 5 ]

Checklist for giving a complete review for a research article[ 2 , 3 , 5 , 8 , 9 , 11 , 15 , 17 , 18 , 23 ]

Comments to the Editors: The strengths and weaknesses of the paper should be clearly identified by the reviewer in their confidential comments to the editors.[ 5 , 8 , 15 , 17 ] The recommendation (if) given by the reviewer (reject, major revision, minor revision, or accept) should be supported by their main review. The reviewers may suggest an appropriate journal section for which the manuscript can be assigned to. The reviewers may also ask for changes in the format/type of the manuscript (e.g., an original article to be converted to a brief original article/report or a research letter).[ 8 ] These recommendations are useful to the editors but not necessarily binding on them.

Some journals have started using “postpublication” system, wherein the reviewed and the accepted manuscript is posted on the website in advance of the paper publication; readers comment on the same and such (reader's) comments can be actually published with the manuscript itself.[ 5 , 7 , 10 , 11 ] Many open access journals have started following the “light touch peer review” wherein the review is focused on the methodology.[ 7 ] Some journals publish the peer reviewer comments or the entire “prepublication history” (submitted versions, reviewer's reports, and author responses) and the timelines online (as a weblink) with the journal article.[ 7 , 12 ] There are journals where a reviewed manuscript draft is posted electronically for critique by the academic community and after a defined period, the modified draft paper is accepted for publication.[ 7 , 12 ] In journal review networks/peer review consortia, the reviews are transferred from one journal to another after rejection, this saves on reviewer/editor time and reduces duplication of work.[ 5 , 10 , 13 ]“Publons” ( https://publons.com/about/home/ ) is a website which builds public reviewer profiles for participating reviewers. The “Publons” profile shows a researcher's verified review history across all journals, gives various reviewer metrics, and gives credits for work as a reviewer/editor. Useful guidance on ethics of publication and peer review is available on the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) website ( https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers ) and authors, reviewers, and editors need to be acquainted with these.

It is an honour and privilege to review papers and reviewers need to do it with a sense of responsibility, integrity, and altruism.[ 7 , 15 ] The reviewer needs to be polite and systematic while performing the review. Proper reviewer conduct makes the peer review process valuable and the journal becomes more trustworthy.[ 15 ] Peer review has thus been called the “heart and soul of scientific publishing”.[ 15 ] A systematic well-organized review is appreciated by the editors/authors and facilitates manuscript revision.[ 17 ] The entire peer review process is based on mutual trust between the authors and editors and also between the editors and reviewers.[ 15 ] This editorial has given an account of the peer review process and guidance for the reviewer to write good (and practically useful) reviews. It is hoped that this editorial will help the reviewers in their career in reviewing as well as assist the authors in medical writing.

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Research Paper – Structure, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Paper

Definition:

Research Paper is a written document that presents the author’s original research, analysis, and interpretation of a specific topic or issue.

It is typically based on Empirical Evidence, and may involve qualitative or quantitative research methods, or a combination of both. The purpose of a research paper is to contribute new knowledge or insights to a particular field of study, and to demonstrate the author’s understanding of the existing literature and theories related to the topic.

Structure of Research Paper

The structure of a research paper typically follows a standard format, consisting of several sections that convey specific information about the research study. The following is a detailed explanation of the structure of a research paper:

The title page contains the title of the paper, the name(s) of the author(s), and the affiliation(s) of the author(s). It also includes the date of submission and possibly, the name of the journal or conference where the paper is to be published.

The abstract is a brief summary of the research paper, typically ranging from 100 to 250 words. It should include the research question, the methods used, the key findings, and the implications of the results. The abstract should be written in a concise and clear manner to allow readers to quickly grasp the essence of the research.

Introduction

The introduction section of a research paper provides background information about the research problem, the research question, and the research objectives. It also outlines the significance of the research, the research gap that it aims to fill, and the approach taken to address the research question. Finally, the introduction section ends with a clear statement of the research hypothesis or research question.

Literature Review

The literature review section of a research paper provides an overview of the existing literature on the topic of study. It includes a critical analysis and synthesis of the literature, highlighting the key concepts, themes, and debates. The literature review should also demonstrate the research gap and how the current study seeks to address it.

The methods section of a research paper describes the research design, the sample selection, the data collection and analysis procedures, and the statistical methods used to analyze the data. This section should provide sufficient detail for other researchers to replicate the study.

The results section presents the findings of the research, using tables, graphs, and figures to illustrate the data. The findings should be presented in a clear and concise manner, with reference to the research question and hypothesis.

The discussion section of a research paper interprets the findings and discusses their implications for the research question, the literature review, and the field of study. It should also address the limitations of the study and suggest future research directions.

The conclusion section summarizes the main findings of the study, restates the research question and hypothesis, and provides a final reflection on the significance of the research.

The references section provides a list of all the sources cited in the paper, following a specific citation style such as APA, MLA or Chicago.

How to Write Research Paper

You can write Research Paper by the following guide:

• Choose a Topic: The first step is to select a topic that interests you and is relevant to your field of study. Brainstorm ideas and narrow down to a research question that is specific and researchable.
• Conduct a Literature Review: The literature review helps you identify the gap in the existing research and provides a basis for your research question. It also helps you to develop a theoretical framework and research hypothesis.
• Develop a Thesis Statement : The thesis statement is the main argument of your research paper. It should be clear, concise and specific to your research question.
• Plan your Research: Develop a research plan that outlines the methods, data sources, and data analysis procedures. This will help you to collect and analyze data effectively.
• Collect and Analyze Data: Collect data using various methods such as surveys, interviews, observations, or experiments. Analyze data using statistical tools or other qualitative methods.
• Organize your Paper : Organize your paper into sections such as Introduction, Literature Review, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion. Ensure that each section is coherent and follows a logical flow.
• Write your Paper : Start by writing the introduction, followed by the literature review, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. Ensure that your writing is clear, concise, and follows the required formatting and citation styles.
• Edit and Proofread your Paper: Review your paper for grammar and spelling errors, and ensure that it is well-structured and easy to read. Ask someone else to review your paper to get feedback and suggestions for improvement.
• Cite your Sources: Ensure that you properly cite all sources used in your research paper. This is essential for giving credit to the original authors and avoiding plagiarism.

Research Paper Example

Note : The below example research paper is for illustrative purposes only and is not an actual research paper. Actual research papers may have different structures, contents, and formats depending on the field of study, research question, data collection and analysis methods, and other factors. Students should always consult with their professors or supervisors for specific guidelines and expectations for their research papers.

Research Paper Example sample for Students:

Title: The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health among Young Adults

Abstract: This study aims to investigate the impact of social media use on the mental health of young adults. A literature review was conducted to examine the existing research on the topic. A survey was then administered to 200 university students to collect data on their social media use, mental health status, and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. The results showed that social media use is positively associated with depression, anxiety, and stress. The study also found that social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO (Fear of Missing Out) are significant predictors of mental health problems among young adults.

Introduction: Social media has become an integral part of modern life, particularly among young adults. While social media has many benefits, including increased communication and social connectivity, it has also been associated with negative outcomes, such as addiction, cyberbullying, and mental health problems. This study aims to investigate the impact of social media use on the mental health of young adults.

Literature Review: The literature review highlights the existing research on the impact of social media use on mental health. The review shows that social media use is associated with depression, anxiety, stress, and other mental health problems. The review also identifies the factors that contribute to the negative impact of social media, including social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO.

Methods : A survey was administered to 200 university students to collect data on their social media use, mental health status, and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. The survey included questions on social media use, mental health status (measured using the DASS-21), and perceived impact of social media on their mental health. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and regression analysis.

Results : The results showed that social media use is positively associated with depression, anxiety, and stress. The study also found that social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO are significant predictors of mental health problems among young adults.

Discussion : The study’s findings suggest that social media use has a negative impact on the mental health of young adults. The study highlights the need for interventions that address the factors contributing to the negative impact of social media, such as social comparison, cyberbullying, and FOMO.

Conclusion : In conclusion, social media use has a significant impact on the mental health of young adults. The study’s findings underscore the need for interventions that promote healthy social media use and address the negative outcomes associated with social media use. Future research can explore the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing the negative impact of social media on mental health. Additionally, longitudinal studies can investigate the long-term effects of social media use on mental health.

Limitations : The study has some limitations, including the use of self-report measures and a cross-sectional design. The use of self-report measures may result in biased responses, and a cross-sectional design limits the ability to establish causality.

Implications: The study’s findings have implications for mental health professionals, educators, and policymakers. Mental health professionals can use the findings to develop interventions that address the negative impact of social media use on mental health. Educators can incorporate social media literacy into their curriculum to promote healthy social media use among young adults. Policymakers can use the findings to develop policies that protect young adults from the negative outcomes associated with social media use.

References :

• Twenge, J. M., & Campbell, W. K. (2019). Associations between screen time and lower psychological well-being among children and adolescents: Evidence from a population-based study. Preventive medicine reports, 15, 100918.
• Primack, B. A., Shensa, A., Escobar-Viera, C. G., Barrett, E. L., Sidani, J. E., Colditz, J. B., … & James, A. E. (2017). Use of multiple social media platforms and symptoms of depression and anxiety: A nationally-representative study among US young adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 1-9.
• Van der Meer, T. G., & Verhoeven, J. W. (2017). Social media and its impact on academic performance of students. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 383-398.

Appendix : The survey used in this study is provided below.

Social Media and Mental Health Survey

• How often do you use social media per day?
• Less than 30 minutes
• 30 minutes to 1 hour
• 1 to 2 hours
• 2 to 4 hours
• More than 4 hours
• Which social media platforms do you use?
• Others (Please specify)
• How often do you experience the following on social media?
• Social comparison (comparing yourself to others)
• Cyberbullying
• Fear of Missing Out (FOMO)
• Have you ever experienced any of the following mental health problems in the past month?
• Do you think social media use has a positive or negative impact on your mental health?
• Very positive
• Somewhat positive
• Somewhat negative
• Very negative
• In your opinion, which factors contribute to the negative impact of social media on mental health?
• Social comparison
• In your opinion, what interventions could be effective in reducing the negative impact of social media on mental health?
• Education on healthy social media use
• Counseling for mental health problems caused by social media
• Social media detox programs
• Regulation of social media use

Thank you for your participation!

Applications of Research Paper

Research papers have several applications in various fields, including:

• Advancing knowledge: Research papers contribute to the advancement of knowledge by generating new insights, theories, and findings that can inform future research and practice. They help to answer important questions, clarify existing knowledge, and identify areas that require further investigation.
• Informing policy: Research papers can inform policy decisions by providing evidence-based recommendations for policymakers. They can help to identify gaps in current policies, evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, and inform the development of new policies and regulations.
• Improving practice: Research papers can improve practice by providing evidence-based guidance for professionals in various fields, including medicine, education, business, and psychology. They can inform the development of best practices, guidelines, and standards of care that can improve outcomes for individuals and organizations.
• Educating students : Research papers are often used as teaching tools in universities and colleges to educate students about research methods, data analysis, and academic writing. They help students to develop critical thinking skills, research skills, and communication skills that are essential for success in many careers.
• Fostering collaboration: Research papers can foster collaboration among researchers, practitioners, and policymakers by providing a platform for sharing knowledge and ideas. They can facilitate interdisciplinary collaborations and partnerships that can lead to innovative solutions to complex problems.

When to Write Research Paper

Research papers are typically written when a person has completed a research project or when they have conducted a study and have obtained data or findings that they want to share with the academic or professional community. Research papers are usually written in academic settings, such as universities, but they can also be written in professional settings, such as research organizations, government agencies, or private companies.

Here are some common situations where a person might need to write a research paper:

• For academic purposes: Students in universities and colleges are often required to write research papers as part of their coursework, particularly in the social sciences, natural sciences, and humanities. Writing research papers helps students to develop research skills, critical thinking skills, and academic writing skills.
• For publication: Researchers often write research papers to publish their findings in academic journals or to present their work at academic conferences. Publishing research papers is an important way to disseminate research findings to the academic community and to establish oneself as an expert in a particular field.
• To inform policy or practice : Researchers may write research papers to inform policy decisions or to improve practice in various fields. Research findings can be used to inform the development of policies, guidelines, and best practices that can improve outcomes for individuals and organizations.
• To share new insights or ideas: Researchers may write research papers to share new insights or ideas with the academic or professional community. They may present new theories, propose new research methods, or challenge existing paradigms in their field.

Purpose of Research Paper

The purpose of a research paper is to present the results of a study or investigation in a clear, concise, and structured manner. Research papers are written to communicate new knowledge, ideas, or findings to a specific audience, such as researchers, scholars, practitioners, or policymakers. The primary purposes of a research paper are:

• To contribute to the body of knowledge : Research papers aim to add new knowledge or insights to a particular field or discipline. They do this by reporting the results of empirical studies, reviewing and synthesizing existing literature, proposing new theories, or providing new perspectives on a topic.
• To inform or persuade: Research papers are written to inform or persuade the reader about a particular issue, topic, or phenomenon. They present evidence and arguments to support their claims and seek to persuade the reader of the validity of their findings or recommendations.
• To advance the field: Research papers seek to advance the field or discipline by identifying gaps in knowledge, proposing new research questions or approaches, or challenging existing assumptions or paradigms. They aim to contribute to ongoing debates and discussions within a field and to stimulate further research and inquiry.
• To demonstrate research skills: Research papers demonstrate the author’s research skills, including their ability to design and conduct a study, collect and analyze data, and interpret and communicate findings. They also demonstrate the author’s ability to critically evaluate existing literature, synthesize information from multiple sources, and write in a clear and structured manner.

Characteristics of Research Paper

Research papers have several characteristics that distinguish them from other forms of academic or professional writing. Here are some common characteristics of research papers:

• Evidence-based: Research papers are based on empirical evidence, which is collected through rigorous research methods such as experiments, surveys, observations, or interviews. They rely on objective data and facts to support their claims and conclusions.
• Structured and organized: Research papers have a clear and logical structure, with sections such as introduction, literature review, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. They are organized in a way that helps the reader to follow the argument and understand the findings.
• Formal and objective: Research papers are written in a formal and objective tone, with an emphasis on clarity, precision, and accuracy. They avoid subjective language or personal opinions and instead rely on objective data and analysis to support their arguments.
• Citations and references: Research papers include citations and references to acknowledge the sources of information and ideas used in the paper. They use a specific citation style, such as APA, MLA, or Chicago, to ensure consistency and accuracy.
• Peer-reviewed: Research papers are often peer-reviewed, which means they are evaluated by other experts in the field before they are published. Peer-review ensures that the research is of high quality, meets ethical standards, and contributes to the advancement of knowledge in the field.
• Objective and unbiased: Research papers strive to be objective and unbiased in their presentation of the findings. They avoid personal biases or preconceptions and instead rely on the data and analysis to draw conclusions.

Advantages of Research Paper

Research papers have many advantages, both for the individual researcher and for the broader academic and professional community. Here are some advantages of research papers:

• Contribution to knowledge: Research papers contribute to the body of knowledge in a particular field or discipline. They add new information, insights, and perspectives to existing literature and help advance the understanding of a particular phenomenon or issue.
• Opportunity for intellectual growth: Research papers provide an opportunity for intellectual growth for the researcher. They require critical thinking, problem-solving, and creativity, which can help develop the researcher’s skills and knowledge.
• Career advancement: Research papers can help advance the researcher’s career by demonstrating their expertise and contributions to the field. They can also lead to new research opportunities, collaborations, and funding.
• Academic recognition: Research papers can lead to academic recognition in the form of awards, grants, or invitations to speak at conferences or events. They can also contribute to the researcher’s reputation and standing in the field.
• Impact on policy and practice: Research papers can have a significant impact on policy and practice. They can inform policy decisions, guide practice, and lead to changes in laws, regulations, or procedures.
• Advancement of society: Research papers can contribute to the advancement of society by addressing important issues, identifying solutions to problems, and promoting social justice and equality.

Limitations of Research Paper

Research papers also have some limitations that should be considered when interpreting their findings or implications. Here are some common limitations of research papers:

• Limited generalizability: Research findings may not be generalizable to other populations, settings, or contexts. Studies often use specific samples or conditions that may not reflect the broader population or real-world situations.
• Potential for bias : Research papers may be biased due to factors such as sample selection, measurement errors, or researcher biases. It is important to evaluate the quality of the research design and methods used to ensure that the findings are valid and reliable.
• Ethical concerns: Research papers may raise ethical concerns, such as the use of vulnerable populations or invasive procedures. Researchers must adhere to ethical guidelines and obtain informed consent from participants to ensure that the research is conducted in a responsible and respectful manner.
• Limitations of methodology: Research papers may be limited by the methodology used to collect and analyze data. For example, certain research methods may not capture the complexity or nuance of a particular phenomenon, or may not be appropriate for certain research questions.
• Publication bias: Research papers may be subject to publication bias, where positive or significant findings are more likely to be published than negative or non-significant findings. This can skew the overall findings of a particular area of research.
• Time and resource constraints: Research papers may be limited by time and resource constraints, which can affect the quality and scope of the research. Researchers may not have access to certain data or resources, or may be unable to conduct long-term studies due to practical limitations.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts

Original Article

Tamoxifen enhances stemness and promotes metastasis of ERα36 + breast cancer by upregulating ALDH1A1 in cancer cells

• Xiu-Wu Bian

Structure of the human activated spliceosome in three conformational states

• Xiaofeng Zhang
• Chuangye Yan

Diverse modes of clonal evolution in HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma revealed by single-cell genome sequencing

• Junfeng Hao

Eosinophil-derived CCL-6 impairs hematopoietic stem cell homeostasis

• Huahao Shen

Whole-genome sequencing reveals principles of brain retrotransposition in neurodevelopmental disorders

• Jasmine Jacob-Hirsch
• Gideon Rechavi

H5N1 influenza virus-specific miRNA-like small RNA increases cytokine production and mouse mortality via targeting poly(rC)-binding protein 2

• Chen-Yu Zhang

Histone H3 lysine 4 monomethylation modulates long-range chromatin interactions at enhancers

• Shi-An A Chen

Cryo-EM structure of human ATR-ATRIP complex

• Mengjie Liu

Landscape of the regulatory elements for lysine 2-hydroxyisobutyrylation pathway

• Zhouqing Luo
• Yingming Zhao

Structural basis for specific flagellin recognition by the NLR protein NAIP5

Structural and functional analyses of the mammalian TIN2-TPP1-TRF2 telomeric complex

Structure of the fission yeast S. pombe telomeric Tpz1-Poz1-Rap1 complex

• Hongwen Chen

Integrated genomic analysis identifies deregulated JAK/STAT-MYC-biosynthesis axis in aggressive NK-cell leukemia

• Liang Huang
• Qian-fei Wang

Mouse embryonic stem cells have increased capacity for replication fork restart driven by the specific Filia-Floped protein complex

• Weidao Zhang

Endothelial cell-derived GABA signaling modulates neuronal migration and postnatal behavior

• Peeyush Kumar T
• Anju Vasudevan

Molecular mechanism of directional CTCF recognition of a diverse range of genomic sites

Excessive UBE3A dosage impairs retinoic acid signaling and synaptic plasticity in autism spectrum disorders

• Xingxing Xu
• Chuanyin Li

Derivation of hypermethylated pluripotent embryonic stem cells with high potency

• Walfred WC Tang
• M Azim Surani

H7N9 virulent mutants detected in chickens in China pose an increased threat to humans

• Jianzhong Shi
• Guohua Deng
• Hualan Chen

Wnt-induced Vangl2 phosphorylation is dose-dependently required for planar cell polarity in mammalian development

• Lisa Garrett

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Original Research Articles

Preparing your manuscript.

The title page should:

• present a title that includes, if appropriate, the study design
• if a collaboration group should be listed as an author, please list the Group name as an author. If you would like the names of the individual members of the Group to be searchable through their individual PubMed records, please include this information in the “Acknowledgements” section in accordance with the instructions below
• Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT , do not currently satisfy our authorship criteria . Notably an attribution of authorship carries with it accountability for the work, which cannot be effectively applied to LLMs. Use of an LLM should be properly documented in the Methods section (and if a Methods section is not available, in a suitable alternative part) of the manuscript
• indicate the corresponding author

The abstract should not exceed 350 words. Please minimize the use of abbreviations and do not cite references in the abstract. The abstract must include the following separate sections:

• Background : the context and purpose of the study
• Results : the main findings
• Conclusions : a brief summary and potential implications

Three to ten keywords representing the main content of the article.

The Background section should explain the background to the study, its aims, a summary of the existing literature and why this study was necessary.

This should include the findings of the study including, if appropriate, results of statistical analysis which must be included either in the text or as tables and figures.

For research articles this section should discuss the implications of the findings in context of existing research and highlight limitations of the study. For study protocols and methodology manuscripts this section should include a discussion of any practical or operational issues involved in performing the study and any issues not covered in other sections.

Conclusions

This should state clearly the main conclusions and provide an explanation of the importance and relevance of the study to the field.

Methods (can also be placed after Background)

The methods section should include:

• the aim, design and setting of the study
• the characteristics of participants or description of materials
• a clear description of all processes, interventions and comparisons. Generic names should generally be used. When proprietary brands are used in research, include the brand names in parentheses
• the type of statistical analysis used, including a power calculation if appropriate

List of abbreviations

If abbreviations are used in the text they should be defined in the text at first use, and a list of abbreviations should be provided.

Declarations

All manuscripts must contain the following sections under the heading 'Declarations':

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Consent for publication.

• Availability of data and material

Competing interests

Authors' contributions, acknowledgements.

• Authors' information (optional)

Please see below for details on the information to be included in these sections.

If any of the sections are not relevant to your manuscript, please include the heading and write 'Not applicable' for that section.

Manuscripts reporting studies involving human participants, human data or human tissue must:

• include a statement on ethics approval and consent (even where the need for approval was waived)
• include the name of the ethics committee that approved the study and the committee’s reference number if appropriate

Studies involving animals must include a statement on ethics approval.

See our  editorial policies  for more information.

If your manuscript does not report on or involve the use of any animal or human data or tissue, please state “Not applicable” in this section.

If your manuscript contains any individual person’s data in any form (including individual details, images or videos), consent to publish must be obtained from that person, or in the case of children, their parent or legal guardian. All presentations of case reports must have consent to publish.

You can use your institutional consent form if you prefer. You should not send the form to us on submission, but we may request to see a copy at any stage (including after publication).

See our  editorial policies  for more information on consent for publication.

If your manuscript does not contain data from any individual person, please state “Not applicable” in this section.

Availability of data and materials

All manuscripts must include an ‘Availability of data and materials’ statement. Data availability statements should include information on where data supporting the results reported in the article can be found including, where applicable, hyperlinks to publicly archived datasets analysed or generated during the study. By data we mean the minimal dataset that would be necessary to interpret, replicate and build upon the findings reported in the article. We recognise it is not always possible to share research data publicly, for instance when individual privacy could be compromised, and in such instances data availability should still be stated in the manuscript along with any conditions for access.

Data availability statements can take one of the following forms (or a combination of more than one if required for multiple datasets):

• The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT WEB LINK TO DATASETS]
• The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
• All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].
• The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due [REASON WHY DATA ARE NOT PUBLIC] but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
• Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
• The data that support the findings of this study are available from [third party name] but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of [third party name].
• Not applicable. If your manuscript does not contain any data, please state 'Not applicable' in this section.

More examples of template data availability statements, which include examples of openly available and restricted access datasets, are available  here .

SpringerOpen  also requires that authors cite any publicly available data on which the conclusions of the paper rely in the manuscript. Data citations should include a persistent identifier (such as a DOI) and should ideally be included in the reference list. Citations of datasets, when they appear in the reference list, should include the minimum information recommended by DataCite and follow journal style. Dataset identifiers including DOIs should be expressed as full URLs. For example:

Hao Z, AghaKouchak A, Nakhjiri N, Farahmand A. Global integrated drought monitoring and prediction system (GIDMaPS) data sets. figshare. 2014.  http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.853801

With the corresponding text in the Availability of data and materials statement:

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT WEB LINK TO DATASETS]. [Reference number]

All financial and non-financial competing interests must be declared in this section.

See our  editorial policies  for a full explanation of competing interests. If you are unsure whether you or any of your co-authors have a competing interest please contact the editorial office.

Please use the authors’ initials to refer to each authors' competing interests in this section.

If you do not have any competing interests, please state "The authors declare that they have no competing interests" in this section.

All sources of funding for the research reported should be declared. The role of the funding body in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript should be declared.

The individual contributions of authors to the manuscript should be specified in this section. Guidance and criteria for authorship can be found in our  editorial policies .

Please use initials to refer to each author's contribution in this section, for example: "FC analyzed and interpreted the patient data regarding the hematological disease and the transplant. RH performed the histological examination of the kidney, and was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript."

Please acknowledge anyone who contributed towards the article who does not meet the criteria for authorship including anyone who provided professional writing services or materials.

Authors should obtain permission to acknowledge from all those mentioned in the Acknowledgements section.

See our  editorial policies  for a full explanation of acknowledgements and authorship criteria.

If you do not have anyone to acknowledge, please write "Not applicable" in this section.

Group authorship (for manuscripts involving a collaboration group): if you would like the names of the individual members of a collaboration Group to be searchable through their individual PubMed records, please ensure that the title of the collaboration Group is included on the title page and in the submission system and also include collaborating author names as the last paragraph of the “Acknowledgements” section. Please add authors in the format First Name, Middle initial(s) (optional), Last Name. You can add institution or country information for each author if you wish, but this should be consistent across all authors.

Please note that individual names may not be present in the PubMed record at the time a published article is initially included in PubMed as it takes PubMed additional time to code this information.

Authors' information

This section is optional.

You may choose to use this section to include any relevant information about the author(s) that may aid the reader's interpretation of the article, and understand the standpoint of the author(s). This may include details about the authors' qualifications, current positions they hold at institutions or societies, or any other relevant background information. Please refer to authors using their initials. Note this section should not be used to describe any competing interests.

Footnotes should be designated within the text using a superscript number. It is not allowed to use footnotes for references/citations.

Radiochemistry Nomenclature Guidelines

The EJNMMI Journal Family endorses the application of the International Consensus Radiochemistry Nomenclature Guidelines for contributions to the journals. A three page summary of the guidelines, highlighting the most relevant issues used in the notation of radiopharmaceuticals and related terms, is available at EJNMMI Radiopharmacy and Chemistry . The Editors-in-Chief of the EJNMMI Journal Family strongly recommend all manuscripts meet these guidelines submission, and all reviewers are asked to check, wherever possible, that the guidelines are followed. Their endorsement can be found here . 

The full paper with all recommendations is published in “Consensus nomenclature rules for radiopharmaceutical chemistry — setting the record straight”, Coenen and Gee et al. (2017), Nuclear Medicine and Biology   here .

Examples of the Vancouver reference style are shown below. 

See our editorial policies for author guidance on good citation practice.

Web links and URLs: All web links and URLs, including links to the authors' own websites, should be given a reference number and included in the reference list rather than within the text of the manuscript. They should be provided in full, including both the title of the site and the URL, as well as the date the site was accessed, in the following format: The Mouse Tumor Biology Database. http://tumor.informatics.jax.org/mtbwi/index.do . Accessed 20 May 2013. If an author or group of authors can clearly be associated with a web link, such as for weblogs, then they should be included in the reference.

Example reference style:

Article within a journal

Smith JJ. The world of science. Am J Sci. 1999;36:234-5.

Article within a journal (no page numbers)

Rohrmann S, Overvad K, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Jakobsen MU, Egeberg R, Tjønneland A, et al. Meat consumption and mortality - results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. BMC Medicine. 2013;11:63.

Article within a journal by DOI

Slifka MK, Whitton JL. Clinical implications of dysregulated cytokine production. Dig J Mol Med. 2000; doi:10.1007/s801090000086.

Article within a journal supplement

Frumin AM, Nussbaum J, Esposito M. Functional asplenia: demonstration of splenic activity by bone marrow scan. Blood 1979;59 Suppl 1:26-32.

Book chapter, or an article within a book

Wyllie AH, Kerr JFR, Currie AR. Cell death: the significance of apoptosis. In: Bourne GH, Danielli JF, Jeon KW, editors. International review of cytology. London: Academic; 1980. p. 251-306.

OnlineFirst chapter in a series (without a volume designation but with a DOI)

Saito Y, Hyuga H. Rate equation approaches to amplification of enantiomeric excess and chiral symmetry breaking. Top Curr Chem. 2007. doi:10.1007/128_2006_108.

Complete book, authored

Blenkinsopp A, Paxton P. Symptoms in the pharmacy: a guide to the management of common illness. 3rd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Science; 1998.

Online document

Doe J. Title of subordinate document. In: The dictionary of substances and their effects. Royal Society of Chemistry. 1999. http://www.rsc.org/dose/title of subordinate document. Accessed 15 Jan 1999.

Online database

Healthwise Knowledgebase. US Pharmacopeia, Rockville. 1998. http://www.healthwise.org. Accessed 21 Sept 1998.

Supplementary material/private homepage

Doe J. Title of supplementary material. 2000. http://www.privatehomepage.com. Accessed 22 Feb 2000.

University site

Doe, J: Title of preprint. http://www.uni-heidelberg.de/mydata.html (1999). Accessed 25 Dec 1999.

Doe, J: Trivial HTTP, RFC2169. ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2169.txt (1999). Accessed 12 Nov 1999.

Organization site

ISSN International Centre: The ISSN register. http://www.issn.org (2006). Accessed 20 Feb 2007.

Dataset with persistent identifier

Zheng L-Y, Guo X-S, He B, Sun L-J, Peng Y, Dong S-S, et al. Genome data from sweet and grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). GigaScience Database. 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.5524/100012 .

General formatting information

Manuscripts must be written in concise English. For help on scientific writing, or preparing your manuscript in English, please see Springer's  Author Academy .

Quick points:

• Use double line spacing
• Include line and page numbering
• Use SI units: Please ensure that all special characters used are embedded in the text, otherwise they will be lost during conversion to PDF
• Do not use page breaks in your manuscript

File formats

The following word processor file formats are acceptable for the main manuscript document:

• Microsoft word (DOC, DOCX)
• Rich text format (RTF)
• TeX/LaTeX 

Please note: editable files are required for processing in production. If your manuscript contains any non-editable files (such as PDFs) you will be required to re-submit an editable file if your manuscript is accepted.

For more information, see ' Preparing figures ' below.

Additional information for TeX/LaTeX users

You are encouraged to use the Springer Nature LaTeX template when preparing a submission. A PDF of your manuscript files will be compiled during submission using pdfLaTeX and TexLive 2021. All relevant editable source files must be uploaded during the submission process. Failing to submit these source files will cause unnecessary delays in the production process.  

Style and language

For editors and reviewers to accurately assess the work presented in your manuscript you need to ensure the English language is of sufficient quality to be understood. If you need help with writing in English you should consider:

• Getting a fast, free online grammar check .
• Visiting the English language tutorial which covers the common mistakes when writing in English.
• Asking a colleague who is proficient in English to review your manuscript for clarity.
• Using a professional language editing service where editors will improve the English to ensure that your meaning is clear and identify problems that require your review. Two such services are provided by our affiliates Nature Research Editing Service and American Journal Experts . SpringerOpen authors are entitled to a 10% discount on their first submission to either of these services. To claim 10% off English editing from Nature Research Editing Service, click here . To claim 10% off American Journal Experts, click here .

Please note that the use of a language editing service is not a requirement for publication in EJNMMI Research and does not imply or guarantee that the article will be selected for peer review or accepted.  为便于编辑和评审专家准确评估您稿件中陈述的研究工作，您需要确保文稿英语语言质量足以令人理解。如果您需要英文写作方面的帮助，您可以考虑：

• 获取快速、免费的在线  语法检查 。
• 查看一些有关英语写作中常见语言错误的 教程 。
• 请一位以英语为母语的同事审阅您的稿件是否表意清晰。
• 使用专业语言编辑服务，编辑人员会对英语进行润色，以确保您的意思表达清晰，并提出需要您复核的问题。例如我们的附属机构 Nature Research Editing Service 以及合作伙伴 American Journal Experts 都可以提供此类专业服务。SpringerOpen作者享受首次订单10%优惠，该优惠同时适用于两家公司。您只需点击以下链接即可开始。使用 Nature Research Editing Service的编辑润色10%的优惠服务，请点击 这里 。使用 American Journal Experts的10%优惠服务，请点击 这里 。

请注意，使用语言编辑服务并非在期刊上发表文章的必要条件，这也并不意味或保证文章将被选中进行同行评议或被接受。 エディターと査読者があなたの論文を正しく評価するには、使用されている英語の質が十分であることが必要とされます。英語での論文執筆に際してサポートが必要な場合には、次のオプションがあります：

• 高速なオンライン  文法チェック  を無料で受ける。
• 英語で執筆する際のよくある間違いに関する 英語のチュートリアル を参照する。
• 英語を母国語とする同僚に、原稿内の英語が明確であるかをチェックしてもらう。
• プロの英文校正サービスを利用する。校正者が原稿の意味を明確にしたり、問題点を指摘し、英語を向上させます。 Nature Research Editing Service と American Journal Experts の2つは弊社と提携しているサービスです。SpringerOpenのジャーナルの著者は、いずれかのサービスを初めて利用する際に、10%の割引を受けることができます。Nature Research Editing Serviceの10%割引を受けるには、 こちらをクリックしてください 。. American Journal Expertsの10%割引を受けるには、 こちらをクリックしてください 。

英文校正サービスの利用は、このジャーナルに掲載されるための条件ではないこと、また論文審査や受理を保証するものではないことに留意してください。 영어 원고의 경우, 에디터 및 리뷰어들이 귀하의 원고에 실린 결과물을 정확하게 평가할 수 있도록, 그들이 충분히 이해할 수 있을 만한 수준으로 작성되어야 합니다. 만약 영작문과 관련하여 도움을 받기를 원하신다면 다음의 사항들을 고려하여 주십시오:

• 영어 튜토리얼 페이지 에 방문하여 영어로 글을 쓸 때 자주하는 실수들을 확인합니다.
• 귀하의 원고의 표현을 명확히 해줄 영어 원어민 동료를 찾아서 리뷰를 의뢰합니다
• 리뷰에 대비하여, 원고의 의미를 명확하게 해주고 리뷰에서 요구하는 문제점들을 식별해서 영문 수준을 향상시켜주는 전문 영문 교정 서비스를 이용합니다. Nature Research Editing Service 와 American Journal Experts 에서 저희와 협약을 통해 서비스를 제공하고 있습니다. SpringerOpen에서는 위의 두 가지의 서비스를 첫 논문 투고를 위해 사용하시는 경우, 10%의 할인을 제공하고 있습니다. Nature Research Editing Service이용시 10% 할인을 요청하기 위해서는 여기 를 클릭해 주시고, American Journal Experts 이용시 10% 할인을 요청하기 위해서는 여기 를 클릭해 주십시오.

영문 교정 서비스는 게재를 위한 요구사항은 아니며, 해당 서비스의 이용이 피어 리뷰에 논문이 선택되거나 게재가 수락되는 것을 의미하거나 보장하지 않습니다.

Data and materials

For all journals, SpringerOpen strongly encourages all datasets on which the conclusions of the manuscript rely to be either deposited in publicly available repositories (where available and appropriate) or presented in the main paper or additional supporting files, in machine-readable format (such as spread sheets rather than PDFs) whenever possible. Please see the list of recommended repositories in our editorial policies.

For some journals, deposition of the data on which the conclusions of the manuscript rely is an absolute requirement. Please check the Instructions for Authors for the relevant journal and article type for journal specific policies.

For all manuscripts, information about data availability should be detailed in an ‘Availability of data and materials’ section. For more information on the content of this section, please see the Declarations section of the relevant journal’s Instruction for Authors. For more information on SpringerOpen's policies on data availability, please see our editorial policies .

Formatting the 'Availability of data and materials' section of your manuscript

The following format for the 'Availability of data and materials section of your manuscript should be used:

"The dataset(s) supporting the conclusions of this article is(are) available in the [repository name] repository, [unique persistent identifier and hyperlink to dataset(s) in http:// format]."

The following format is required when data are included as additional files:

"The dataset(s) supporting the conclusions of this article is(are) included within the article (and its additional file(s))."

For databases, this section should state the web/ftp address at which the database is available and any restrictions to its use by non-academics.

For software, this section should include:

• Project name: e.g. My bioinformatics project
• Project home page: e.g. http://sourceforge.net/projects/mged
• Archived version: DOI or unique identifier of archived software or code in repository (e.g. enodo)
• Operating system(s): e.g. Platform independent
• Programming language: e.g. Java
• Other requirements: e.g. Java 1.3.1 or higher, Tomcat 4.0 or higher
• License: e.g. GNU GPL, FreeBSD etc.
• Any restrictions to use by non-academics: e.g. licence needed

Information on available repositories for other types of scientific data, including clinical data, can be found in our editorial policies .

What should be cited?

Only articles, clinical trial registration records and abstracts that have been published or are in press, or are available through public e-print/preprint servers, may be cited.

Unpublished abstracts, unpublished data and personal communications should not be included in the reference list, but may be included in the text and referred to as "unpublished observations" or "personal communications" giving the names of the involved researchers. Obtaining permission to quote personal communications and unpublished data from the cited colleagues is the responsibility of the author. Either footnotes or endnotes are permitted. Journal abbreviations follow Index Medicus/MEDLINE.

Any in press articles cited within the references and necessary for the reviewers' assessment of the manuscript should be made available if requested by the editorial office.

Preparing figures

When preparing figures, please follow the formatting instructions below.

• Figure titles (max 15 words) and legends (max 300 words) should be provided in the main manuscript, not in the graphic file.
• Tables should NOT be submitted as figures but should be included in the main manuscript file.
• Multi-panel figures (those with parts a, b, c, d etc.) should be submitted as a single composite file that contains all parts of the figure.
• Figures should be numbered in the order they are first mentioned in the text, and uploaded in this order.
• Figures should be uploaded in the correct orientation.
• Figure keys should be incorporated into the graphic, not into the legend of the figure.
• Each figure should be closely cropped to minimize the amount of white space surrounding the illustration. Cropping figures improves accuracy when placing the figure in combination with other elements when the accepted manuscript is prepared for publication on our site. For more information on individual figure file formats, see our detailed instructions.
• Individual figure files should not exceed 10 MB. If a suitable format is chosen, this file size is adequate for extremely high quality figures.
• Please note that it is the responsibility of the author(s) to obtain permission from the copyright holder to reproduce figures (or tables) that have previously been published elsewhere. In order for all figures to be open access, authors must have permission from the rights holder if they wish to include images that have been published elsewhere in non open access journals. Permission should be indicated in the figure legend, and the original source included in the reference list.

Figure file types

We accept the following file formats for figures:

• EPS (suitable for diagrams and/or images)
• PDF (suitable for diagrams and/or images)
• Microsoft Word (suitable for diagrams and/or images, figures must be a single page)
• PowerPoint (suitable for diagrams and/or images, figures must be a single page)
• TIFF (suitable for images)
• JPEG (suitable for photographic images, less suitable for graphical images)
• PNG (suitable for images)
• BMP (suitable for images)
• CDX (ChemDraw - suitable for molecular structures)

Figure size and resolution

Figures are resized during publication of the final full text and PDF versions to conform to the SpringerOpen standard dimensions, which are detailed below.

Figures on the web:

• width of 600 pixels (standard), 1200 pixels (high resolution).

Figures in the final PDF version:

• width of 85 mm for half page width figure
• width of 170 mm for full page width figure
• maximum height of 225 mm for figure and legend
• image resolution of approximately 300 dpi (dots per inch) at the final size

Figures should be designed such that all information, including text, is legible at these dimensions. All lines should be wider than 0.25 pt when constrained to standard figure widths. All fonts must be embedded.

Figure file compression

Vector figures should if possible be submitted as PDF files, which are usually more compact than EPS files.

• TIFF files should be saved with LZW compression, which is lossless (decreases file size without decreasing quality) in order to minimize upload time.
• JPEG files should be saved at maximum quality.
• Conversion of images between file types (especially lossy formats such as JPEG) should be kept to a minimum to avoid degradation of quality.

If you have any questions or are experiencing a problem with figures, please contact the customer service team at [email protected] .

Preparing tables

When preparing tables, please follow the formatting instructions below.

• Tables should be numbered and cited in the text in sequence using Arabic numerals (i.e. Table 1, Table 2 etc.).
• Tables less than one A4 or Letter page in length can be placed in the appropriate location within the manuscript.
• Tables larger than one A4 or Letter page in length can be placed at the end of the document text file. Please cite and indicate where the table should appear at the relevant location in the text file so that the table can be added in the correct place during production.
• Larger datasets, or tables too wide for A4 or Letter landscape page can be uploaded as additional files. Please see [below] for more information.
• Tabular data provided as additional files can be uploaded as an Excel spreadsheet (.xls ) or comma separated values (.csv). Please use the standard file extensions.
• Table titles (max 15 words) should be included above the table, and legends (max 300 words) should be included underneath the table.
• Tables should not be embedded as figures or spreadsheet files, but should be formatted using ‘Table object’ function in your word processing program.
• Color and shading may not be used. Parts of the table can be highlighted using superscript, numbering, lettering, symbols or bold text, the meaning of which should be explained in a table legend.
• Commas should not be used to indicate numerical values.

If you have any questions or are experiencing a problem with tables, please contact the customer service team at [email protected] .

Preparing additional files

As the length and quantity of data is not restricted for many article types, authors can provide datasets, tables, movies, or other information as additional files.

All Additional files will be published along with the accepted article. Do not include files such as patient consent forms, certificates of language editing, or revised versions of the main manuscript document with tracked changes. Such files, if requested, should be sent by email to the journal’s editorial email address, quoting the manuscript reference number.

Results that would otherwise be indicated as "data not shown" should be included as additional files. Since many web links and URLs rapidly become broken, SpringerOpen requires that supporting data are included as additional files, or deposited in a recognized repository. Please do not link to data on a personal/departmental website. Do not include any individual participant details. The maximum file size for additional files is 20 MB each, and files will be virus-scanned on submission. Each additional file should be cited in sequence within the main body of text.

Submit manuscript

• Editorial Board
• Sign up for article alerts and news from this journal

Annual Journal Metrics

2022 Citation Impact 3.2 - 2-year Impact Factor 3.3 - 5-year Impact Factor 0.932 - SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper) 0.853 - SJR (SCImago Journal Rank)

2023 Speed 12 days submission to first editorial decision for all manuscripts (Median) 87 days submission to accept (Median)

2023 Usage  604,325 downloads 175 Altmetric mentions 

• More about our metrics
• Follow us on Twitter
• Follow us on Facebook
• ISSN: 2191-219X (electronic)

Affiliated with

European Association of Nuclear Medicine

Visit and follow the  EANM  on their social media channels:

Albert Einstein

Papers Volume 1 Volume 10 Volume 12 Volume 13 Volume 2 Volume 3 Volume 4 Volume 5 Volume 6 Volume 7 Volume 8 Volume 9 all documents

Advanced search

The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein brought to you by:

Powered by Tizra ®

• Terms of Service
• Permissions

The Simple Macroeconomics of AI

This paper evaluates claims about large macroeconomic implications of new advances in AI. It starts from a task-based model of AI’s effects, working through automation and task complementarities. So long as AI’s microeconomic effects are driven by cost savings/productivity improvements at the task level, its macroeconomic consequences will be given by a version of Hulten’s theorem: GDP and aggregate productivity gains can be estimated by what fraction of tasks are impacted and average task-level cost savings. Using existing estimates on exposure to AI and productivity improvements at the task level, these macroeconomic effects appear nontrivial but modest—no more than a 0.66% increase in total factor productivity (TFP) over 10 years. The paper then argues that even these estimates could be exaggerated, because early evidence is from easy-to-learn tasks, whereas some of the future effects will come from hard-to-learn tasks, where there are many context-dependent factors affecting decision-making and no objective outcome measures from which to learn successful performance. Consequently, predicted TFP gains over the next 10 years are even more modest and are predicted to be less than 0.53%. I also explore AI’s wage and inequality effects. I show theoretically that even when AI improves the productivity of low-skill workers in certain tasks (without creating new tasks for them), this may increase rather than reduce inequality. Empirically, I find that AI advances are unlikely to increase inequality as much as previous automation technologies because their impact is more equally distributed across demographic groups, but there is also no evidence that AI will reduce labor income inequality. Instead, AI is predicted to widen the gap between capital and labor income. Finally, some of the new tasks created by AI may have negative social value (such as design of algorithms for online manipulation), and I discuss how to incorporate the macroeconomic effects of new tasks that may have negative social value.

Paper prepared for Economic Policy. I am grateful to Can Yeşildere for phenomenal research assistance, and to Leonardo Bursztyn, Mert Demirer, Lauren Fahey, Roberto Galbiati, Isabelle Méjean, Shakked Noy, Sida Peng, Julia Regier, and Whitney Zhang as well as participants in the MIT Solow Memorial conference and the Economic Policy conference for useful comments. I am especially grateful to my discussants, David Hémous and Benoît Coeuré, for insightful comments and suggestions. I thank Pamela Mishkin and Daniel Rock for generously sharing their data on AI exposure. I am also heavily indebted to my collaborators on several projects related to these topics, David Autor, Simon Johnson and Pascual Restrepo, from whom I learned a great deal and who have also given me very useful comments on the current draft. Financial support from the Hewlett Foundation is gratefully acknowledged. All remaining errors are mine. The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

MARC RIS BibTeΧ

Download Citation Data

Mentioned in the News

More from nber.

In addition to working papers , the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter , the NBER Digest , the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability , the Bulletin on Health , and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship  — as well as online conference reports , video lectures , and interviews .

We will keep fighting for all libraries - stand with us!

Internet Archive Audio

• This Just In
• Grateful Dead
• Old Time Radio
• 78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
• Audio Books & Poetry
• Computers, Technology and Science
• Music, Arts & Culture
• News & Public Affairs
• Spirituality & Religion
• Radio News Archive

• Flickr Commons
• Occupy Wall Street Flickr
• NASA Images
• Solar System Collection
• Ames Research Center

• All Software
• Old School Emulation
• MS-DOS Games
• Historical Software
• Classic PC Games
• Software Library
• Kodi Archive and Support File
• Vintage Software
• CD-ROM Software
• CD-ROM Software Library
• Software Sites
• Tucows Software Library
• Shareware CD-ROMs
• Software Capsules Compilation
• CD-ROM Images
• ZX Spectrum
• DOOM Level CD

• Smithsonian Libraries
• FEDLINK (US)
• Lincoln Collection
• American Libraries
• Canadian Libraries
• Universal Library
• Project Gutenberg
• Children's Library
• Biodiversity Heritage Library
• Books by Language
• Additional Collections

• Prelinger Archives
• Democracy Now!
• Occupy Wall Street
• TV NSA Clip Library
• Animation & Cartoons
• Arts & Music
• Computers & Technology
• Cultural & Academic Films
• Ephemeral Films
• Sports Videos
• Videogame Videos
• Youth Media

Search the history of over 866 billion web pages on the Internet.

Mobile Apps

• Wayback Machine (iOS)
• Wayback Machine (Android)

Browser Extensions

Archive-it subscription.

• Explore the Collections
• Build Collections

Save Page Now

Capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future.

Please enter a valid web address

• Donate Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape

The principle of relativity; original papers

Bookreader item preview, share or embed this item, flag this item for.

• Graphic Violence
• Explicit Sexual Content
• Hate Speech
• Misinformation/Disinformation
• Marketing/Phishing/Advertising
• Misleading/Inaccurate/Missing Metadata

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

59,893 Views

129 Favorites

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

For users with print-disabilities

IN COLLECTIONS

Uploaded by tim-thompson on April 15, 2008

SIMILAR ITEMS (based on metadata)

Suggestions or feedback?

MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

• Machine learning
• Social justice
• Black holes
• Classes and programs

Departments

• Aeronautics and Astronautics
• Brain and Cognitive Sciences
• Architecture
• Political Science
• Mechanical Engineering

Centers, Labs, & Programs

• Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL)
• Picower Institute for Learning and Memory
• Lincoln Laboratory
• School of Architecture + Planning
• School of Engineering
• School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences
• Sloan School of Management
• School of Science
• MIT Schwarzman College of Computing

Adhesive coatings can prevent scarring around medical implants

Press contact :, media download.

*Terms of Use:

Images for download on the MIT News office website are made available to non-commercial entities, press and the general public under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives license . You may not alter the images provided, other than to crop them to size. A credit line must be used when reproducing images; if one is not provided below, credit the images to "MIT."

Previous image Next image

When medical devices such as pacemakers are implanted in the body, they usually provoke an immune response that leads to buildup of scar tissue around the implant. This scarring, known as fibrosis, can interfere with the devices’ function and may require them to be removed.

In an advance that could prevent that kind of device failure, MIT engineers have found a simple and general way to eliminate fibrosis by coating devices with a hydrogel adhesive. This adhesive binds the devices to tissue and prevents the immune system from attacking it.

“The dream of many research groups and companies is to implant something into the body that over the long term the body will not see, and the device can provide therapeutic or diagnostic functionality. Now we have such an ‘invisibility cloak,’ and this is very general: There’s no need for a drug, no need for a special polymer,” says Xuanhe Zhao, an MIT professor of mechanical engineering and of civil and environmental engineering.

The adhesive that the researchers used in this study is made from cross-linked polymers called hydrogels, and is similar to a surgical tape they previously developed to help seal internal wounds. Other types of hydrogel adhesives can also protect against fibrosis, the researchers found, and they believe this approach could be used for not only pacemakers but also sensors or devices that deliver drugs or therapeutic cells.

Zhao and Hyunwoo Yuk SM ’16, PhD ’21, a former MIT research scientist who is now the chief technology officer at SanaHeal, are the senior authors of the study, which appears today in Nature . MIT postdoc Jingjing Wu is the lead author of the paper.

Preventing fibrosis

In recent years, Zhao’s lab has developed adhesives for a variety of medical applications, including double-sided and single-sided tapes that could be used to heal surgical incisions or internal injuries. These adhesives work by rapidly absorbing water from wet tissues, using polyacrylic acid, an absorbent material used in diapers. Once the water is cleared, chemical groups called NHS esters embedded in the polyacrylic acid form strong bonds with proteins at the tissue surface. This process takes about five seconds.

Several years ago, Zhao and Yuk began exploring whether this kind of adhesive could also help keep medical implants in place and prevent fibrosis from occurring.

To test this idea, Wu coated polyurethane devices with their adhesive and implanted them on the abdominal wall, colon, stomach, lung, or heart of rats. Weeks later, they removed the device and found that there was no visible scar tissue. Additional tests with other animal models showed the same thing: Wherever the adhesive-coated devices were implanted, fibrosis did not occur, for up to three months.

“This work really has identified a very general strategy, not only for one animal model, one organ, or one application,” Wu says. “Across all of these animal models, we have consistent, reproducible results without any observable fibrotic capsule.”

Using bulk RNA sequencing and fluorescent imaging, the researchers analyzed the animals’ immune response and found that when devices with adhesive coatings were first implanted, immune cells such as neutrophils began to infiltrate the area. However, the attacks quickly quenched out before any scar tissue could form.

“For the adhered devices, there is an acute inflammatory response because it is a foreign material,” Yuk says. “However, very quickly that inflammatory response decayed, and then from that point you do not have this fibrosis formation.”

One application for this adhesive could be coatings for epicardial pacemakers — devices that are placed on the heart to help control the heart rate. The wires that contact the heart often become fibrotic, but the MIT team found that when they implanted adhesive-coated wires in rats, they remained functional for at least three months, with no scar tissue formation.

“The formation of fibrotic tissue at the interface between implanted medical devices and the target tissue is a longstanding problem that routinely causes failure of the device. The demonstration that robust adhesion between the device and the tissue obviates fibrotic tissue formation is an important observation that has many potential applications in the medical device space,” says David Mooney, a professor of bioengineering at Harvard University, who was not involved in the study.

Mechanical cues

The researchers also tested a hydrogel adhesive that includes chitosan, a naturally occurring polysaccharide, and found that this adhesive also eliminated fibrosis in animal studies. However, two commercially available tissue adhesives that they tested did not show this antifibrotic effect because the commercially available adhesives eventually detached from the tissue and allowed the immune system to attack.

In another experiment, the researchers coated implants in hydrogel adhesives but then soaked them in a solution that removed the polymers’ adhesive properties, while keeping their overall chemical structure the same. After being implanted in the body, where they were held in place by sutures, fibrotic scarring occurred. This suggests that there is something about the mechanical interaction between the adhesive and the tissue that prevents the immune system from attacking, the researchers say.

“Previous research in immunology has been focused on chemistry and biochemistry, but mechanics and physics may play equivalent roles, and we should pay attention to those mechanical and physical cues in immunological responses,” says Zhao, who now plans to further investigate how those mechanical cues affect the immune system.

Yuk, Zhao, and others have started a company called SanaHeal, which is now working on further developing tissue adhesives for medical applications.

“As a team, we are interested in reporting this to the community and sparking speculation and imagination as to where this can go,” Yuk says. “There are so many scenarios in which people want to interface with foreign or manmade material in the body, like implantable devices, drug depots, or cell depots.”

The research was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.

Share this news article on:

Related links.

• Xuanhe Zhao
• Hyunwoo Yuk
• Jingjing Wu
• Department of Mechanical Engineering
• Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Related Topics

• Mechanical engineering
• Civil and environmental engineering
• Biomedical engineering
• Medical devices
• National Institutes of Health (NIH)
• National Science Foundation (NSF)

Related Articles

Engineers develop surgical “duct tape” as an alternative to sutures

Double-sided tape for tissues could replace surgical sutures

Super-strong surgical tape detaches on demand

Paper-folding art inspires better bandages

Previous item Next item

More MIT News

Looking for a specific action in a video? This AI-based method can find it for you

Read full story →

Controlled diffusion model can change material properties in images

Sophia Chen: It’s our duty to make the world better through empathy, patience, and respect

Using art and science to depict the MIT family from 1861 to the present

Convening for cultural change

Q&A: The power of tiny gardens and their role in addressing climate change

• More news on MIT News homepage →

Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, USA

• Map (opens in new window)
• Events (opens in new window)
• People (opens in new window)
• Careers (opens in new window)
• Accessibility
• Social Media Hub
• MIT on Facebook
• MIT on YouTube
• MIT on Instagram

I want to keep my child safe from abuse − but research tells me I’m doing it wrong

Founder and Executive Director, Center for Violence Prevention Research; Affiliate Faculty with the Crimes Against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire

Disclosure statement

Melissa Bright receives funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Childhood Foundation (via work with Stop it Now!).

View all partners

Child sexual abuse is uncomfortable to think about, much less talk about. The idea of an adult engaging in sexual behaviors with a child feels sickening. It’s easiest to believe that it rarely happens, and when it does, that it’s only to children whose parents aren’t protecting them.

This belief stayed with me during my early days as a parent. I kept an eye out for creepy men at the playground and was skeptical of men who worked with young children, such as teachers and coaches. When my kids were old enough, I taught them what a “good touch” was, like a hug from a family member, and what a “bad touch” was, like someone touching their private parts.

But after nearly a quarter-century of conducting research – 15 years on family violence, another eight on child abuse prevention, including sexual abuse – I realized that many people, including me, were using antiquated strategies to protect our children .

As the founder of the Center for Violence Prevention Research , I work with organizations that educate their communities and provide direct services to survivors of child sexual abuse. From them, I have learned much about the everyday actions all of us can take to help keep our children safe. Some of it may surprise you.

Wrong assumptions

First, my view of what constitutes child sexual abuse was too narrow. Certainly, all sexual activities between adults and children are a form of abuse.

But child sexual abuse also includes nonconsensual sexual contact between two children. It includes noncontact offenses such as sexual harassment, exhibitionism and using children to produce imagery of sexual abuse. Technology-based child sexual abuse is rising quickly with the rapid evolution of internet-based games, social media, and content generated by artificial intelligence. Reports to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children of online enticements increased 300% from 2021 to 2023 .

My assumption that child sexual abuse didn’t happen in my community was wrong too. The latest data shows that at least 1 in 10 children, but likely closer to 1 in 5, experience sexual abuse . Statistically, that’s at least two children in my son’s kindergarten class.

Child sexual abuse happens across all ethnoracial groups, socioeconomic statuses and all gender identities. Reports of female victims outnumber males , but male victimization is likely underreported because of stigma and cultural norms about masculinity .

I’ve learned that identifying the “creepy man” at the playground is not an effective strategy. At least 90% of child sexual abusers know their victims or the victims’ family prior to offending. Usually, the abuser is a trusted member of the community; sometimes, it’s a family member .

In other words, rather than search for a predator in the park, parents need to look at the circle of people they invite into their home.

To be clear, abuse by strangers does happen, and teaching our kids to be wary of strangers is necessary. But it’s the exception, not the norm , for child sexual abuse offenses.

Most of the time, it’s not even adults causing the harm. The latest data shows more than 70% of self-reported child sexual abuse is committed by other juveniles . Nearly 1 in 10 young people say they caused some type of sexual harm to another child . Their average age at the time of causing harm is between 14 and 16.

Now for a bit of good news: The belief that people who sexually abuse children are innately evil is an oversimplification. In reality, only about 13% of adults and approximately 5% of adolescents who sexually harm children commit another sexual offense after five years . The recidivism rate is even lower for those who receive therapeutic help .

By contrast, approximately 44% of adults who commit a felony of any kind will commit another offense within a year of prison release .

What parents can do

The latest research says uncomfortable conversations are necessary to keep kids safe. Here are some recommended strategies:

Avoid confusing language. “Good touches” and “bad touches” are no longer appropriate descriptors of abuse . Harmful touches can feel physically good, rather than painful or “bad.” Abusers can also manipulate children to believe their touches are acts of love.

The research shows that it’s better to talk to children about touches that are “OK” or “not OK,” based on who does the touching and where they touch. This dissipates the confusion of something being bad but feeling good.

These conversations require clear identification of all body parts, from head and shoulders to penis and vagina. Using accurate anatomical labels teaches children that all body parts can be discussed openly with safe adults. Also, when children use accurate labels to disclose abuse, they are more likely to be understood and believed.

Encourage bodily autonomy. Telling my children that hugs from family members were universally good touches was also wrong . If children think they have to give hugs on demand, it conveys the message they do not have authority over their body.

Instead, I watch when my child is asked for a hug at family gatherings – if he hesitates, I advocate for him. I tell family members that physical touch is not mandatory and explain why – something like: “He prefers a bit more personal space, and we’re working on teaching him that he can decide who touches him and when. He really likes to give high-fives to show affection.” A heads-up: Often, the adults are put off, at least initially.

In my family, we also don’t allow the use of guilt to encourage affection. That includes phrases like: “You’ll make me sad if you don’t give me a hug.”

Promote empowerment. Research on adult sexual offenders found the greatest deterrence to completing the act was a vocal child – one who expressed their desire to stop, or said they would tell others.

Monitor your child’s social media. Multiple studies show that monitoring guards against sexting or viewing of pornography , both of which are risk factors for child sexual abuse. Monitoring can also reveal permissive or dangerous sexual attitudes the child might have.

Talk to the adults in your circle. Ask those watching your child how they plan to keep your child safe when in their care. Admittedly, this can be an awkward conversation. I might say, “Hey, I have a few questions that might sound weird, but I think they’re important for parents to ask. I’m sure my child will be safe with you, but I’m trying to talk about these things regularly, so this is good practice for me.” You may need to educate them on what the research shows.

Ask your child’s school what they’re doing to educate students and staff about child sexual abuse. Many states require schools to provide prevention education; recent research suggests these programs help children protect themselves from sexual abuse .

Talk to your child’s sports or activity organization. Ask what procedures are in place to keep children safe . This includes their screening and hiring practices, how they train and educate staff, and their guidelines for reporting abuse. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provides a guide for organizations on keeping children safe .

Rely on updated research. Finally, when searching online for information, look for research that’s relatively recent – dated within the past five years. These studies should be published in peer-reviewed journals .

And then be prepared for a jolt. You may discover the conventional wisdom you’ve clung to all these years may be based on outdated – and even harmful – information.

• Child sexual abuse
• Child sexual abuse prevention
• Child safety

Head, School of Psychology

Senior Lecturer (ED) Ballarat

Senior Research Fellow - Women's Health Services

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Marketing

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship