How to Read a Paper

  • Hutan Ashrafian
  • Thanos Athanasiou
Chapter

Abstract

To adequately equip surgeons with the required skills necessary to successfully read a paper, one needs not only time and energy but also a core level of experience. This chapter aims to classify the components that make up a scientific paper with the goal of presenting the audience to some of the analytical concepts that will enable the successful reading of a surgical paper.

Keywords

Scientific Paper Reading Strategy Research Assessment Exercise Ancillary Information Surgical Journal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Albert T (1995) How “Imradiation” has ruined the writing of scientists. Eur SciGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barraclough K (2004) Why doctors don't read. Br Med J 329:1411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bates T, Anic A, Marusic M et al (2004) Authorship criteria and disclosure of contributions: comparison of 3 general medical journals with different author contribution forms. JAMA 292:86–88PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bazerman C (1985) Physicists reading physics: schema-laden purposes and purpose-laden schema. Written Commun 2:3–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boseley S. Medical studies ‘rubbish’. The Guardian 1998, 24 June, p5Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brown H (2007) How impact factors changed medical pub-lishing–and science. Br Med J 334:561–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Burrough-Boenisch J (1999) International reading strategies for IMRD articles. Written Commun 16:296–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    de Solla Price D (1981) The development and structure of the biomedical literature. In: Warren KS (ed) Coping with the biomedical literature: A primer for the scientist and the clinician. Praeger, New York, pp 3–16Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dirk L (1999) A measure of originality: the elements of science. Soc Stud Sci 29:765–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horton R (2004) A statement by the editors of The Lancet. Lancet 363:820–821PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ide CW (2005) Why doctors don't read research papers: editors' behaviour might have something to do with it. Br Med J 330:256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    International_Committee_of_Medical_Journal_Editors_ (ICMJE) (2007) Publication Ethics: Sponsorship, Authorship, and Accountability. Available at: http://www.icmje.org/spon-sor.htm
  13. 13.
    Jung CG (1981) The structure and dynamics of the psyche. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Laurance WF (2006) Second thoughts on who goes where in author lists. Nature 442:26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lieberman P, Laitman JT, Reidenberg JS et al (1992) The anatomy, physiology, acoustics and perception of speech: essential elements in analysis of the evolution of human speech. J Hum Evol 23:447–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    O'Donnell M (2005) Why doctors don't read research papers: scientific papers are not written to disseminate information. Br Med J 330:256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Oxford_Centre_for_Evidence-based_Medicine (2001) Levels of Evidence. Available at: http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx? o = 1025
  18. 18.
    Robinson FP (1970) Effective study. Harper & Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shannon CE (1948) A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J 27:379–423, 623–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Slade M, Priebe S (2001) Are randomised controlled trials the only gold that glitters? Br J Psychiatry 179:286–287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Spache GD, Berg PC (1966) The art of efficient reading. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tscharntke T, Hochberg ME, Rand TA et al (2007) Author sequence and credit for contributions in multiauthored publications. PLoS Biol 5:e18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vital MV (2006) Author lists: specify who did what to aid assessment. Nature 443:26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wager E (2007) Do medical journals provide clear and consistent guidelines on authorship? MedGenMed 9:16PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hutan Ashrafian
    • 1
  • Thanos Athanasiou
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biosurgery and Surgical TechnologyImperial College London, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother (QEQM) Building, Imperial College Healthcare NHS TrustLondonUK

Personalised recommendations