A Survey of the Course: 'How to Successfully Write a Scientific Article'.

IF 1.3 Q3 PEDIATRICS
Tamara Sljivancanin Jakovljevic, Nadja Nikolic, Jelena Martic
{"title":"A Survey of the Course: 'How to Successfully Write a Scientific Article'.","authors":"Tamara Sljivancanin Jakovljevic,&nbsp;Nadja Nikolic,&nbsp;Jelena Martic","doi":"10.2174/0115733963277385230920054052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of the present survey was to analyze the knowledge and skills in medical paper writing of physicians who attended the course \"how to write successfully a scientific paper.\"</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A blind survey was used to analyze participants' knowledge on the topic of the course \"how to write successfully a scientific paper.\" Before starting the workshop, participants anonymously filled out the input questionnaire containing 12 preliminary data questions. The three-hour course included a lecture on the steps of creating and writing a scientific article with examples. At the end, all participants anonymously completed the exit questionnaire consisting of 18 questions. Differences and associations between the collected data were analyzed using appropriate statistical tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The survey included 22 participants, most of whom were women (16, 72.7%). The participants' educational level was proportional to their age. 12 of the participants had an intermediate level, while the others reported higher English proficiency. Half of the participants had never published an article. A significant difference was observed between English level and being the first author of an article published in a scientific journal (p = 0.044). Before class, only 13.6% of participants knew that guidelines are mandatory for making clinical decisions according to evidence- based medicine. There was a significant positive correlation between sex and current affiliation (p = 0.038). A negative correlation was observed between sex and article publication (p = 0.037). A positive correlation was observed between English level and current affiliation (p = 0.020). There was a negative correlation observed between previous sources of learning scientific article writing and having already published an article (p = 0.025). A positive correlation was found between reading an article and publishing it (p = 0.046). Statistical analysis showed a significant difference between reading frequency, number of published articles, being the first author, and knowing the title of a scientific article (p = 0.036, p = 0.027, and p = 0.030, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of the questionnaires revealed discrepancies in prior research engagement and understanding of scientific concepts and rules. This survey highlights the importance of the course \"how to successfully write a scientific article\" in improving participants' knowledge of scientific work and the process of creating an article for submission to medical journals.</p>","PeriodicalId":11175,"journal":{"name":"Current Pediatric Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Pediatric Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/0115733963277385230920054052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim of the present survey was to analyze the knowledge and skills in medical paper writing of physicians who attended the course "how to write successfully a scientific paper."

Methods: A blind survey was used to analyze participants' knowledge on the topic of the course "how to write successfully a scientific paper." Before starting the workshop, participants anonymously filled out the input questionnaire containing 12 preliminary data questions. The three-hour course included a lecture on the steps of creating and writing a scientific article with examples. At the end, all participants anonymously completed the exit questionnaire consisting of 18 questions. Differences and associations between the collected data were analyzed using appropriate statistical tests.

Results: The survey included 22 participants, most of whom were women (16, 72.7%). The participants' educational level was proportional to their age. 12 of the participants had an intermediate level, while the others reported higher English proficiency. Half of the participants had never published an article. A significant difference was observed between English level and being the first author of an article published in a scientific journal (p = 0.044). Before class, only 13.6% of participants knew that guidelines are mandatory for making clinical decisions according to evidence- based medicine. There was a significant positive correlation between sex and current affiliation (p = 0.038). A negative correlation was observed between sex and article publication (p = 0.037). A positive correlation was observed between English level and current affiliation (p = 0.020). There was a negative correlation observed between previous sources of learning scientific article writing and having already published an article (p = 0.025). A positive correlation was found between reading an article and publishing it (p = 0.046). Statistical analysis showed a significant difference between reading frequency, number of published articles, being the first author, and knowing the title of a scientific article (p = 0.036, p = 0.027, and p = 0.030, respectively).

Conclusion: The results of the questionnaires revealed discrepancies in prior research engagement and understanding of scientific concepts and rules. This survey highlights the importance of the course "how to successfully write a scientific article" in improving participants' knowledge of scientific work and the process of creating an article for submission to medical journals.

“如何成功地写一篇科学论文”课程综述。
背景:本调查的目的是分析参加“如何成功撰写科学论文”课程的医生在医学论文撰写方面的知识和技能。方法:采用盲法调查分析参与者对“如何成功编写科学论文”主题的知识,参与者匿名填写了包含12个初步数据问题的输入问卷。这门三小时的课程包括一堂关于创建和撰写科学文章的步骤的讲座,并附有示例。最后,所有参与者匿名完成了由18个问题组成的退出问卷。使用适当的统计检验来分析所收集数据之间的差异和关联。结果:该调查包括22名参与者,其中大多数是女性(16,72.7%)。参与者的教育水平与年龄成正比。其中12名参与者的英语水平中等,其他人的英语水平较高。一半的参与者从未发表过文章。英语水平与在科学期刊上发表文章的第一作者之间存在显著差异(p=0.044)。在上课前,只有13.6%的参与者知道根据循证医学做出临床决策的指南是强制性的。性别和当前的隶属关系之间存在显著的正相关(p=0.038)。性别和文章发表之间存在负相关(p=0.037)。英语水平和当前的从属关系之间存在正相关(p=0.020)。以前学习科学文章写作的来源和已经学习科学文章的来源之间存在负相关性发表文章(p=0.025)。阅读文章和发表文章之间呈正相关(p=0.046)。统计分析显示,阅读频率、发表文章数量、第一作者、,以及知道科学文章的标题(分别为p=0.036、p=0.027和p=0.030)。结论:问卷调查结果显示,在先前的研究参与和对科学概念和规则的理解方面存在差异。这项调查强调了“如何成功撰写科学文章”课程在提高参与者对科学工作的认识以及撰写提交给医学期刊的文章的过程中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
66
期刊介绍: Current Pediatric Reviews publishes frontier reviews on all the latest advances in pediatric medicine. The journal’s aim is to publish the highest quality review articles dedicated to clinical research in the field. The journal is essential reading for all researchers and clinicians in pediatric medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信