Analysis of different sections in Research Articles.

According to Pintos & Crimi (2010) ‘Discussion’ sections can be written in isolation or together with the conclusions (p. 20). In the case of the article by Wijeysundera et al, the conclusions are not written separately from the discussions. The discussions section form part of the main division in the paper, whereas, the conclusions appear as a sub category within the ‘Discussion’ section.

Further to the listing of the main characteristics of ‘Discussion’ and ‘Conclusion’ sections Pintos & Crimi (2010) state that “writers use the conclusion to tie the paper together. One way to do this is to develop or allude to some point mentioned in the introduction” (p.20). This may hold true in the paper to be analyzed as the three sentences that make up the conclusion are a restatement of issues mentioned in the introduction.

In some articles opening phrases such as “ All in all”, “All things considered” or “In conclusion” can be read , but, “serious academic writing avoids concluding paragraphs that begin with [these phrases] (…)” (Pintos & Crimi , 2010, p.12). Wijeysundera et al. (2010)´s article does not make use of these markers, making the conclusion straight forward and sound. If the length of the whole article is considered , it can be affirmed that the conclusions section is comparatively short. That might be the reason for including it within the discussions section.

Although the authors decided to blend the last two sections into one, the main objective of the conclusions section seems to have been achieved as the three main points in the research are clearly argumented within this last subsection. The conclusion seems to be inkeeping with the qualities of surgery - clear cut and straightforward.

The ‘References’ section does not follow the American Psychological Association (APA) style which is the academic style applied in Psychology and the Social Sciences. Research in the field of medicine follows the conventions of the Vancouver style (V) or the American Medical Association (AMA) style. This can be illustrated in the layout of the references at the end of the article. However, this section quite deviates from the conventions in the title of this page. In both styles, V and AMA, the last page is entitled ‘References’.

In the article by Wijeysundera et al. (2010),the references are not listed on a separate sheet and they appear listed below some complementary data on funding, competing interests, ethical approval and data sharing. The numbering of the references seems to comply with the requirements of V and AMA styles in which “(…) the references are listed by number [a superscript Arabic numeral – my addition], in order of appearance within the text, not alphabetically. Each reference is listed once only, since the same number is used throughout the paper.” (Learning Resources Centre, n.d., p.1) Within each reference authors are not listed alphabetically either.

Reference number 1 reads as follows: Devereaux PJ, Goldman L, Cook DJ, Gilbert K, Leslie K, Guyatt GH. This example illustrates the point mentioned above and also shows that the position of periods and commas after last names and initials differs from the conventions in APA style. Moreover, in AMA and V styles semicolons are placed after the of journals´ publication year. Colons are placed between the volume number and supplement number – issue number or page number/s. i.e : CMAJ 2005;173:627-34.

All in all, it may be noted that the Research Article (RA) by Wijeysundera, Beattie, Elliot, Austin, Hux & Laupacis (2010) complies with the common underlying structures for research writing in the medicine field and is aligned with the scientific protocol of medicine RAs.


References

AMA Citation style: a Concise guide.[online notes] Retrieved May 25th, 2010 from www.amastyle.org

Learning Resource Centre.- references according to the Vancouver style .[online notes] Retrieved May 25th, 2010 from file:///F:/References%20Vancouver%20Style.htm

Pintos, V. & Crimi, Y. (2010) Unit 3- Lengua Especializada II. UNVIERSIDAD CAECE. Retrieved from www.caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar

Wijeysundera,D.N., Beattie, W.S., Elliot, R.F., Austin, P.C., Hux, J.E., & Laupacis, A. (2010). Non – invasive cardiac stress testing before elective major non –cardiac surgery: Population based cohort study. BMJ, 340 (b5526), 1-9.doi:10.1136/bmj.b5526