Drug Information Journal - March 2009 - (Page 113) Writing Manuscripts SPECIAL FEATURE 113 the current study only, and study designs for subsequent trials are best omitted. Probably the most egregious error is ending the article with the platitude “The results of this study show that more work should be done.” More work should always be done to confirm and reconfirm the findings. The article should end with a statement of how the research question was answered (eg, “The results of this study suggest that readers of Drug Information Journal are aware of the structure and roles of the FDA”). T H O S E E X T R A T O U C H E S T H AT SHOW YOU CARE As a professional writer and instructor of writing, I notice everything: grammar, layout, reference format, tables, and figures. We all have grammatical peccadilloes, or in my case, grammatical errors that I make consistently. For this reason, I try to have another professional writer read my final draft, not only to check for these grammatical errors but also to review for common sense and clarity. I also notice how references are cited in text (whether formatted by name and date or numbered). References formatted by name and date should be listed alphabetically by author’s last name, then either from oldest to newest or vice versa, and then alphabetically within years. Simply listing references in alphabetical order is amateurish. If references are numbered rather than formatted by name and date, select an order and follow it for the first citation of a reference. Most journals will not accept automated reference lists, as these lists are particularly prone to errors (8). Graphics programs are fun for authors, but not necessarily for reviewers or readers. Ensure that symbols are consistent throughout all figures so we can follow your chain of thought. A table with a single row of data is not a true table; this information can be added to the body of the article. It is important to confirm that every table or figure identified in the text does exist and has been added to the article. Conversely, it is important to confirm that every table and figure submitted with the article is identified in the text. When submitting an article, it generally is not necessary to add a note such as “Insert table X here.” Tables and figures are added to the manuscript after the references, and their placement in the article is left to the discretion of the copyeditor for the journal. Data given in tables and figures are referred to and summarized, but are not repeated in the text. The purpose of tables and figures is to relieve the reader from trying to comprehend line after line of numbers. When asked for key words, it is best not to repeat the words in the title. The purpose of key words is to help interested readers search for and find your article. Words in the title are automatic hits in a search. Try to find other words or phrases that adequately describe your work. When asked for MeSH key words (Medical Subject Headers), do so (9). If you are not familiar with MeSH terms, a medical librarian generally can assist you. SPECIAL NOTES ON “SURVEYS” Perhaps due to the easy access of online survey programs and the daily surveys on the Internet and in newspapers, many survey articles are submitted for publication consideration. Unfortunately, many of these “surveys” do not meet the standards of a scientific survey, which are as robust as those of a clinical trial. Some types of surveys involve talking with people through focus groups and personal interviews. Other surveys collect information through questionnaires by email, regular mail, or in offices or over the telephone. Talking with people and holding focus groups often are good ways to start collecting information; however, all surveys must follow quite stringent steps to be considered valid. Discussion of the development, testing, and validation of a survey instrument would require another article, but drawing conclusions based on a small-group discussion that has not been repeated does not constitute a survey. Companies that conduct surveys understand that the shade of the questionnaire paper, the size of the font, the temperature of the room, and many other factors all must be validated and can bias the results. Hence, asking colleagues their opinion on a specific regulatory topic probably is not a survey, which does not mean the data are worthless. Drug Information Journal
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.