3-6
Writing and Publishing Scientific Articles
Examples of Good and Bad Introductions At the end of this chapter are well-written and poorly written Introductions for a basic science study and for a clinical study. Why the examples are considered well written or poorly written is indicated on each one. Tailoring the Introduction to Your Audience As you write your article, tailor to the journal’s audience your explanation of the background information and why filling the gap in knowledge is important. For example, suppose your hypothesis is “Mutations in the promoter of the X gene increase the probability of prostate cancer metastasis.” In your Introduction, you will need to describe the evidence suggesting a link between mutations in the X gene promoter and prostate cancer metastasis. If your audience is mostly molecular biologists, then you may need to provide more details about prostate cancer metastasis but fewer details about the X gene. If your audience is mostly physicians, then you may need to provide more details about the X gene but fewer details about prostate cancer metastasis. In this example, filling the gap is important because prostate cancer metastases can be fatal. If the hypothesis is correct, then X gene mutations could be used to identify men at risk for metastasis and the metastases could be detected and treated earlier and perhaps more successfully. Molecular biologists might not know that, so you probably need to explain this implication for a molecular-biologist audience. Physicians might need just a brief reminder. Also, the protein encoded by the X gene might be a target for interventions designed to prevent or treat prostate cancer metastasis. That fact might have to be explained in detail for a physician audience but not for molecular biologists. Avoid stating very obvious information that all your readers will know. For example, do not start your Introduction by saying that cancer is a terrible disease.
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software