Abstract
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a list of practical rules and recommendations for writing a scientific article, with particular reference to radiology. First, we will try to define the main types of articles published in the most important journals1, with particular reference to major papers (composed of the four classic sections Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results and Discussion). Second, we will evaluate the radiologic journals with the recent trend of their impact factor (IF) — explaining its mechanism of calculation — compared with that of nonradiologic journals, a comparison useful for the choice of the suitable journal for submitting an article. Third, we will explain the absolute need of Ethics Committee approval and of informed consent by the patients asked to participate in a clinical study. Fourth, we will illustrate the content of each of the four sections of the major papers and the other associated sections, in particular the Abstract and the References. Moreover, we will provide several partial suggestions for tables, graphs, and figures, as well as some indications on how to interpret the Editor’s response and the comments and criticisms of the reviewers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bossuyt M, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE et al (2003) Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: The STARD initiative. Radiology 226:24–28
Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, et al for the CONSORT Group (2008) Methods and processes of the CONSORT Group: example of an extension for trials assessing non-pharmacologic treatments. Ann Intern Med 148:W60–66
Cavalli-Sforza L, Cavalli-Sforza F (2005) Perché la scienza. L’avventura di un ricercatore. Milan. Mondadori
Dodd JD, MacEneaney PM, Malone DE (2004) Evidence-based radiology: how to quickly assess the validity and strength of publications in the diagnostic radiology literature. Eur Radiol 14:915–922
Gustavii B (2003) How to write and illustrate a scientific paper. New York. Cambridge University Press
Kerkut GA (1983) Choosing a title for a paper. Comp Biochem Physiol 74A:1. Quoted in: Gustavii B (2003) How to write and illustrate a scientific paper. New York. Cambridge University Press
Kliewer MA, DeLong DM, Freed K et al (2004) Peer review at the American Journal of Roentgenology: how reviewer and manuscript characteristics affected editorial decisions on 196 major papers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1545–1550
Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S et al (1999) Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses. Lancet 354:1896–1900
Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG (2001) The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet 357:1191–1194
Rogers SM (2007) Mastering scientific and medical writing. Berlin. Springer
Sardanelli F, Podo F, D’Agnolo G et al (2007) Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology 242:698–715
World Medical Association (2004) Helsinki Declaration. http://www.wma.net/e/policy/b3.htm. Accessed February 19, 2008
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer-Verlag Italia
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
(2009). How to Write a Radiologic Paper. In: Biostatistics for Radiologists. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1133-5_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1133-5_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Milano
Print ISBN: 978-88-470-1132-8
Online ISBN: 978-88-470-1133-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)