%0 Journal Article %1 Mansfield2005 %A Mansfield, Lyndon %D 2005 %J Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology %K Authorship BiomedicalResearch BiomedicalResearch:ethics BiomedicalResearch:standards Humans PeriodicalsasTopic PeriodicalsasTopic:ethics PeriodicalsasTopic:standards Reading ResearchDesign ResearchDesign:standards Writing Writing:standards %N 2 %P 100-7; qiuz 107-8 %R 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)61198-2 %T The reading, writing, and arithmetic of the medical literature, part 1. %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16136758 %V 95 %X OBJECTIVE: To offer suggestions that will help clinicians improve their scrutiny of the medical literature and apply these suggestions to their own medical writings. DATA SOURCES: Literature searches began at the National Library of Medicine's online database and were traced to primary sources. STUDY SELECTION: All referenced information in this article was cited from primary sources. RESULTS: Objective criteria should be used when assessing the quality of clinical research reports and writing accurate, substantive reports. When reading or writing a journal article, authors should ask themselves if it meets the following standards of high quality: Is the topic or problem important and relevant to current practice? Is the stated reason for the study design valid? Is the description of the study methods clear enough to allow for replication by other researchers? What interventions are being compared, and is the comparison reasonable? Is the number of patients in the study sufficient to show a statistically significant difference? Do the study results have clinical relevance? Are new findings described in relation to the literature? Are both positive and negative aspects of the study addressed? Is the existing literature cited sufficiently? Do the results support the conclusions? CONCLUSION: Reading and interpreting the medical literature require a set of skills that can be learned. Similarly, good medical writing skills can be developed. Achieving these skills should enhance the clinician's practice of medicine. %@ 1081-1206

@article{Mansfield2005, abstract = {OBJECTIVE: To offer suggestions that will help clinicians improve their scrutiny of the medical literature and apply these suggestions to their own medical writings. DATA SOURCES: Literature searches began at the National Library of Medicine's online database and were traced to primary sources. STUDY SELECTION: All referenced information in this article was cited from primary sources. RESULTS: Objective criteria should be used when assessing the quality of clinical research reports and writing accurate, substantive reports. When reading or writing a journal article, authors should ask themselves if it meets the following standards of high quality: Is the topic or problem important and relevant to current practice? Is the stated reason for the study design valid? Is the description of the study methods clear enough to allow for replication by other researchers? What interventions are being compared, and is the comparison reasonable? Is the number of patients in the study sufficient to show a statistically significant difference? Do the study results have clinical relevance? Are new findings described in relation to the literature? Are both positive and negative aspects of the study addressed? Is the existing literature cited sufficiently? Do the results support the conclusions? CONCLUSION: Reading and interpreting the medical literature require a set of skills that can be learned. Similarly, good medical writing skills can be developed. Achieving these skills should enhance the clinician's practice of medicine.}, added-at = {2023-02-03T11:44:35.000+0100}, author = {Mansfield, Lyndon}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/25915692c917cb04a78457556109006e9/jepcastel}, city = {Western Sky Medical Research and Department of Pediatrics, Texas Tech. Regional Health Science Center, El Paso, Texas, USA. immunman@pol.net}, doi = {10.1016/S1081-1206(10)61198-2}, interhash = {2d64397e0dd6c7196f66f77a2401751e}, intrahash = {5915692c917cb04a78457556109006e9}, isbn = {1081-1206}, issn = {1081-1206}, journal = {Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology}, keywords = {Authorship BiomedicalResearch BiomedicalResearch:ethics BiomedicalResearch:standards Humans PeriodicalsasTopic PeriodicalsasTopic:ethics PeriodicalsasTopic:standards Reading ResearchDesign ResearchDesign:standards Writing Writing:standards}, month = {8}, note = {5148<m:linebreak></m:linebreak>LR: 20071115; JID: 9503580; RF: 32; ppublish;<m:linebreak></m:linebreak>Critical appraisal}, number = 2, pages = {100-7; qiuz 107-8}, pmid = {16136758}, timestamp = {2023-02-03T11:44:35.000+0100}, title = {The reading, writing, and arithmetic of the medical literature, part 1.}, url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16136758}, volume = 95, year = 2005 }