La Habana 2016 – Workshop on writing scientific papers

Cuba has excellent health care. Child mortality rates lower than that in the United States of America. Despite having excellent health care, the number of Cuban scientific publications is low. According with studies carried out for: Dr. Ángel A. Escobedo: Academic Paediatric Hospital “Pedro Borrás”, La Habana, Cuba. Dr.C. Yaxsier de Armas: Pedro Kouri Institute, La Habana, Cuba. PHD. John McIntyre: Derbyshire’s Children’s Hospital, Derby, UK. PHD. Imti Choonara: Emeritus Professor in Child Health, Academic Unit of Child Health, The Medical

School Academic Division of Child Health, University of Nottingham, Derbyshire Children’s Hospital, Derby, UK.  

In 2015, there were only 559 scientifi c articles published in peer-reviewed journals by Cuban health

professionals and scientists.

In order to increase the number of scientific publications from Cuba, an annual workshop is held in Havana. Initially the workshop was run by the Universidad de La Habana and the University of Nottingham. For several years, the Cuban Society of Microbiology and Parasitology has been involved. In 2016, the Pedro Kouri Institute was involved

for the first time. The workshop was held on 9 March 2016

Angel Escobedo from the Cuba Society of Microbiology and Parasitology opened the workshop. Yaxiser de Armas from the Pedro Kouri Institute described the current situation with regards to Cuban scientifi c publications. Imti Choonara from the University of Nottingham described how to write scientific papers. It is important to write the paper up in stages and important to follow the instructions to authors in relation to style, sections and wordlimit.

• Introduction and methods should be taken from the protocol When describing the results, it is important to focus

on the important results only.

• Which results are important?

• Use tables/figures where possible

• Give actual numbers not just percentages

• Be concise

Tables are important within a paper and need to be kept simple. Findings need to be listed in a logical

sequence with the table divided into natural subgroups.

• Write one paragraph for each table

• Remove unnecessary columns

• Do not repeat information in the tables but summarise the essential points

Tables are important within a paper and need to be kept simple with any unnecessary columns removed. Findings needed to be listed in a logical sequence with the table divided into natural subgroups.

The discussion should only be written after the results are agreed.

• Decide what is important from your results

• Produce bullet points/ideas regarding your discussion

• Discuss these with your co-investigators

• From your 6-7 bullet points/ideas, write one paragraph for each bullet point/idea

• Only discuss what is relevant, i.e. discuss your results

• Include one concluding paragraph with regards to references, it is important to quote

original research, not just other reviews. The journal instructions for the maximum number of references need to be followed.

The abstract is at the start of the paper but can only be written once the rest of the paper is complete.

• Use a structured abstract-introduction, methods, results, conclusions

• Give numbers, i.e. how many patients, subjects, prescriptions, etc.

• Give P values and confidence intervals if relevant

• Give key findings only

It was also highlighted that many journals now state the authors have to follow the relevant guidelines

i.e. CONSORT for clinical trials, PRISMA for systematic reviews, STROBE for epidemiological

studies.

John McIntyre from Derbyshire Children’s Hospital described the importance of reviewing the

published literature. He highlighted the tools available to critically appraise papers and the different levels of evidence ranging from randomised controlled trials to systematic reviews and meta-analysis.

The importance of assessing research methods by using a standardised approach was highlighted by using different websites (www.sign.ac.uk). Imti Choonara then described the editorial process which usually involves sending out to at least two independent reviewers. An editorial decision of reject and resubmit is actually a positive one. It will include suggested changes from reviewers.

The authors need to try and respond to the suggestions and make the majority of the changes recommended. It is acceptable to not make every change but the author then has to justify why a change has not been made.

General discussion focused on Open Access publication and problems in relation to internet

access. The majority of the Cuban participants felt the workshop was helpful and it was agreed to hold the workshop again in 2018 in conjunction with the Pedro Kouri Institute and the Cuban Society of Microbiology and Parasitology.

Vol. 12, núm. 1 (2016)                                           

Descargar