Discussion? What Needs To Be Discussed?
Journal Title: IDA Ludhiana's Journal - Le Dentistry - Year 2017, Vol 1, Issue 2
Abstract
Original researches, reviews and case reports in journals are the three main arenas by virtue of which a scientist presents his work to the world. The two main categories common in all three of these types of publications are: Introduction and Discussion. While the introduction is meant to take you back to the times where those specific treatment protocols started or explaining the reader the importance of the present study, discussion explains why the author chose this particular treatment protocol or approach to the present condition. Discussion is supposedly the most interesting part of a paper to be written by a scientist/researcher as he can very easily share his feelings regarding the happenings during the course of the study. He can contradict few researches that give contradictory results based on either a flaw in the methodology or a totally different methodology. He can comment onto specific methodologies that he himself adopted in the study different from those followed till date and can explain clearly his thought process while performing the study. Seems interesting?? But alas, this is the most under estimated section of any paper especially in national publications. Instead of making it interesting by adding our inputs, we just compare our results with others and jot it down into the discussion. This takes away the crisp assertions and reasoning that the authors would otherwise pen down to communicate with the scientific community otherwise.My sincere suggestion to all my fellow colleagues serving the profession to feel free to write whatever they want to tell others in a scientific paper. As it is after all your paper, not a comparison of your study with others. Writing a fruitful discussion is an art which can be learnt easily by reading good papers published in leading journals. Just a few points from my side:Start your discussion with a brief introduction of the study objectives and the results obtained and keep adding relevant research articles, if required, and continuing giving your expert comments as to why the specific results were obtained. Always try to justify your results obtained as to why are they different or similar. What is the clinical importance of the results obtained? Sometimes nonsignificant results can also provide significant scientific inputs. A study should end with the limitations that are there and thereby giving future scope of research that can be ensued with this study. References to facts and studies should be least but latest, and few but highly significant.
Authors and Affiliations
Harsimran Sethi
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP561992
- DOI -
- Views 74
- Downloads 0
SAFETY MEASURES IN HISTOPATHOLOGY LABORATORY: A REVIEW
Histopathology is an art of analyzing and interpreting the shapes, sizes and architectural patterns of cells and tissues within a given specific clinical background to arrive at an accurate diagnosis. To function effecti...
ROLE OF HOMEOPATHY MEDICINE IN TREATMENT OF APTHOUS ULCER: A RANDOMIZED STUDY
Background: Dental treatment can be challenging sometimes in managing acute or chronic conditions due to side effects of treatment regimens. Homeopathy has recently gained importance as an alternative medicine for saliva...
A REVIEW ARTICLE – NOT MERELY A COMPILATION OF DATA
Many a times, we have come across situations when we have to write an article that is to be submitted for publication in a journal. Although it should be a part of our daily life to report scientific content to cater our...
LINEAR OCCLUSION AND NEUTRAL ZONE RECORDING USING TISSUE CONDITIONER – REPORT OF A SEVERELY RESORBED RIDGE
Alveolar Ridge Atrophy possesses a clinical challenge towards the Fabrication of successful Prosthesis. Successful Denture treatment in these situations is dependent on the position of Denture Teeth and External Contours...
COMPARISON OF THE EFFECT OF DIFFERENT IRRIGANTS ON SMEAR LAYER REMOVAL DURING ROOT CANAL PREPARATION.
Background: Sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) is the most widely used endodontic irrigant as it fulfills most of the requirements of an ideal irrigant. It has certain drawbacks, chiefly severe soft-tissue damage. Thus, this in...