ReviewJournal of human reproductive sciences
Preparing and Publishing a Scientific Manuscript.
Review in Journal of human reproductive sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Awareness and knowledge of manuscript writing and research integrity: A cross sectional survey among graduate students.Heliyon · 2022Article
- A review of reproducible and transparent research practices in urology publications from 2014 to2018.BMC urology · 2022Review
- Publication addiction during COVID-19 pandemic - A rising boon or a bane.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Writing a Case Report in Pediatric Surgery: A Comprehensive Guideline.European journal of pediatric surgery reports · 2022Article
- Writing a strong scientific paper in medicine and the biomedical sciences: a checklist and recommendations for early career researchers.Biologia futura · 2021Article
- Dos and don'ts of a successfully peer-reviewed publication: From A-Z.European journal of microbiology & immunology · 2020Article
- Predatory Publishers/Journals in Medical Sciences: How to Avoid, Stop, and What to Do after Being Scammed by Them?Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2020Review
- The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Introduction.International journal of endocrinology and metabolism · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Publishing original research in a peer-reviewed and indexed journal is an important milestone for a scientist or a clinician. It is an important parameter to assess academic achievements. However, technical and language barriers may prevent many enthusiasts from ever publishing. This review highlights the important preparatory steps for creating a good manuscript and the most widely used IMRaD (Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion) method for writing a good manuscript. It also provides a brief overview of the submission and review process of a manuscript for publishing in a biomedical journal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.