A manuscript is any document that is submitted for publication. These manuscripts can be anything which may be a piece of music, maybe poetry. But when we think about pure scientific manuscripts, then it is something not like that music or poetry manuscript. It is taken as a different category.
This manuscript could be your original research work, it could be a piece of review of literature, it could be a correspondence, it could be a perspective or it could be an editorial.
So before begin writing your manuscript, you must aware of some, that is
- Where do you start your manuscript?
- What are the things you have traveled so far for your project?
- Where do you want to start writing?
Before we begin writing:
There are essential things you want to know about and what your manuscript contains.
1) Product of the analysis – Tables and figures
2) Key points and recommendations – Central ideas are 2 to 3
3) Outline the argument
And also do some sort of things before do start the manuscript writing.
1. Organize the ideas logically and sequentially within a defined structure.
2. Furnishing additional information before submission
3. Articulate the content to deliver the message effectively.
There is a structure to writing your manuscript for all sorts of writings like your own research, review writing, etc. IMRD structure is the basic structure to follow to give perfect manuscript writing.
You understand that when a given reader reads your article his mind could be in various places. The first thing to do in the introduction section is by zooming in on the reader’s mind. You zoom into the particular research topic that you are going to be discussing in your article.
So in this place, you are going to be giving a background of your research area, what were the knowledge gaps that you identified which sets the stage for stating the rationale of your research project, and finally, you spell out those specific objectives that your project seeks to answer that would be the job of the introduction section.
In the method section, where we explain what you did to meet your objectives and what you do in very simple terms. The method section is usually where you give excruciating details and spell out what you did one by one reader has complete clarity on what you have done and adds to the credibility and reliability of your results.
Note that the method section could vary from study to study and may have different subsections depending on the study design that you have chosen.
While you have study settings, one should remember that you could have international readers reading your article. So, you need to give them a sense of the study settings, and a sense of context, so that they understand and interpret your results correctly. Then you spell out the study design, the operation definitions that you have used in your study, the sampling study procedures which are basically how your study rolled out, how the data was collected, what kind of investigations were performed, and all that.
The next thing would be about data management which involves both data management and analysis. Then the final section is about human participant protection which explaining, what were the ethical principles that you adhered to while conducting your research project.
This could be the briefest section in your article where you only state what your study found. You are presenting your study findings; you could present them as a combination. There is no interpretation or commenting allowed in the results section. So, you plainly state what you have found in your study without delving into trying to comment on it or interpret it which essentially has to be reserved for the discussion section.
This part which is requires the most investment from the researcher himself or herself. This is basically where you look at your results and try to make sense of it. It is where you start thinking as an independent researcher and put out your original interpretations and your inference from your data.
When you write your first complete discussion, I would say it is a coming-of-age experience and a definite milestone for you as a researcher. So, what is there in the discussion section is the first summary of your key findings. Now, this would not be in more than three lines, where you briefly tell. The key finding that your study has come out with are the findings that you will be exploring further in your discussion.
This would be followed by your interpretations of your results and your inference based on them. Some of us also try to compare our findings with other findings in the existing literature. Very often, students tend to make the mistake of dwelling too much on comparing their results with other existing literature and forgetting to add their interpretations and inferences.
So, we should be able to balance between comparing our research findings with other findings that exist in the literature but there we more honest with our interpretations and inferences.
The next section would be on strengths and limitations do not tend to try to boast too much, but please feel free to list all the strengths of your study it could be a novel methodology or a novel tool, or a very remote area. So, whatever is very unique to your study, then mention it under the strengths.
The next would be on limitations where you list the limitations that your study is likely to suffer from. Go easy here with the limitations be honest in reporting all the limitations too, so that the reader can bear these limitations in mind while interpreting your study results.
Also mention how each of your limitations is likely to or not likely to influence your study results. This will be followed by the conclusions, where you give that one take-home result or that one key finding, or that one conclusion that arrives at the end of all your discussion.
This would be followed by the recommendation where you probably going to suggest how the consumer of your article could be a policy maker, which could be a practicing clinician, and how or is recommended to work on your particular conclusion.
The mistake of concluding something that, they have not discussed thus far in the article. So at this point remember that you might have so many results that are coming out of your study but it is essential not to lose focus. So it would be a good practice to stick to those central two to three ideas discussed and keep your discussions, your conclusions, and your recommendations around these central two to three ideas.
This would make it easy for the reader assimilates your research and those central two to three ideas that you have in your mind. So this is what a discussion must-have in the section.
The above article is only the essential thing necessary to know before we start a manuscript. Don’t get panic to write what your mind wants to give in your article, but make sure it is all worth reading for your readers. Don’t make your manuscript too boring by giving well know details for researchers. Point out your key findings, study, researched documents, and discussions in a clear view. If you want to search for manuscript editing or writing, we can get through lots of online editing company helps those who need it.