STOMATOLOGY EDU JOURNAL 2017, Volume 4, Issue 2 2 | Page 16

Cross Sectional Study Case Reports and Series Animal Research Lowest EVIDENCE In Vitro Research Opinion of Experts Figure 2. Pyramid of Evidence. the mentor has enough time to deal and consult the mentee. A good mentor should always be accessible and available to read every document/ draft submitted within a rather short time (better days than months) and return feedback with detailed comments. It would be beneficial for the mentee, if the mentor could provide guidelines, instructions for use and templates. On the other side the mentee cannot expect from the mentor that he/she would do the work. All he/she can do is to consult, open doors and provide connections. As a mentor I like it very much, when the mentee comes up with his/her own idea for a project. 2. Structure of a scientific paper A scientific paper always has the same structure: 2 After the title with the authors and their affiliations and contributions usually the paper should start with an “Abstract”. The body of the paper is opened with an “Introduction”, followed by “Materials & Methods”. Then a chapter “Results” should be followed by a “Discussion” and “Conclusions”. Finally a “Literature” list should complete the paper. This basic framework can be modified depending on the type of publication. In a thesis the introduction serves more than introducing the reader into the topic. The other purpose is that the author must demonstrate his/her competence in the field. Therefore the “Introduction” includes usually an extensive literature review, that may be structured as a subchapter. Also “Materials & Methods” is usually more detailed than in a paper published in a scientific journal. If a thesis deals with multiple experiments it is highly recommended to treat every experiment like a single publication and use a general “Introduction” at the beginning and an allover “Discussion” with conclusions at the end as a big clasp to keep the whole project together. Finally Industrial Reports have slightly dif ferent objectives. Usually the manufacturer wants an answer to a specific question, such as the in vitro wear rate of a material and/or the failure rate 92 and reasons after a specific clinical service time. The “Introduction” of an Industrial Report can be very brief, because one must be assured that the financing partner has done its homework before agreeing to spend money on a study. On the other hand, the chapter “Materials & Methods” cannot be detailed enough. This is important to realize, because if poor results occur it is important to know exactly what has been done. This is the only way to improve the material or the procedure. 3. Creative phase The creative phase is usually the most thrilling part but usually the most difficult as well. It starts with an idea, which most of the time is quite vague. Therefore the first step is to write it down as precisely and clearly as possible. “An idea that cannot be put on paper is not a good idea”. 1 The next step is to collect information about this idea. See if someone else had exactly that idea or a similar idea. Determine what is really new with the idea and where from the idea can be developed further. The answers to these questions lie somewhere in the world literature. Therefore a literature search is unavoidable. The literature found should flow into the personal data bank of the researcher. Modern computer programs like Endnote are very helpful, because they allow easy insertion of literature quotes into a manuscript. Usually such a search starts on the internet and may yield much more papers that one can read. Therefore the search strategy may be refined, which usually parallels refinement of the idea. Once an overseeable number of papers has been found, the articles must be checked whether they are within the scope of the idea, which is usually done by reading the abstracts. The ones that were positively selected should be read. Most information can be extracted from the chapters “Materials & Methods” as well as from the “Result” section. However reading the “Introduction” may reveal more information about the topic of interest and the “Discussion” Stoma Edu J. 2017;4(2): 90-101 http://www.stomaeduj.com Fact (sales) amalgam is substituted by composites Case Control Study Question: composites better than amalgam? Wear, handling recurrent caries Cohort Study Random Controlled Trial question should be the logical consequence of the content of the text above. A very common error is that the research tool used is part of the objective. This may never be the case. First there is the question/problem. Only in the next thought a solution is looked for, which is then described in “Materials & Methods”. In experimental papers the formulation of the objective should be followed by a null hypothesis, which later on can be rejected or accepted. An example for a null hypothesis would be: "All tested composites showed equal wear rate". Writing an introduction means scientific writing which is full of traps, pitfalls and difficulties, especially for a less experienced writer. What is most important is the clarity of the content. Scientific language does not mean complicated language, the contrary is true. The simpler the formulation, the better the understanding. A handicap for most authors of scientific papers is that usually they must be written in English which usually is not their mother tongue. The nomenclature of technical terms must be correct and metric units should be employed 14 (Tab. 1 a-d). Furthermore abbreviations should be explained the first time they are introduced and synonyms should never be used for the same thing. The impersonal form is preferred (“it was done” rather than “I did”) and the use of tempora is clearly defined. Everything that was in the past (results from other researchers, things the authors Meta Analysis Systematic Review may contain helpful thoughts to refine the own question. If the search has found review papers it is a very good start. The next step is a manual search by scanning through the literature lists at the end of the read papers. This may reveal more useful sources. Some of them may not be available on the internet, which requires the physical presence of the researcher in a good scientific library. The above mentioned search of the literature has two functions: one to acquire information and two, to trigger the brain to think more about the original idea. This is the moment to start with writing the Introduction of the planned scientific study. A good way to organize the thinking process is to generate a “mind map” which is a graphical display with textboxes, key words or symbols with lines and arrows that symbolize connections (Fig. 3). This mind map should be the backbone or skeleton of the Introduction since it helps to fulfill the task of informing the reader that never has the idea of the planned study been approached before, about what it is. Beginning very wide and narrowing it down towards more and more specific contents is focusing more and more towards the own project. By definition the last sentence of the Introduction should start with the words: “The objective of the present study is….”. Once the researcher has reached that point usually the originally vague idea has become crystal clear and even more has morphed into a precise scientific question. This Highest EVIDENCE HOW TO SET UP, CONDUCT AND REPORT A SCIENTIFIC STUDY HOW TO SET UP, CONDUCT AND REPORT A SCIENTIFIC STUDY But! Longevity? ! { Clinical controlled prospective randomized studies do NOT represent clinical reality Systematic review Add world wide survey Look also for data from practice based research and clinicians Figure 3. Mind Map. The present format is only for better readability set in the computer. Mind maps are dynamic and should be done by hand on a note pad or a black board. The content of this mindmap is hypothetical, its purpose is to show the principle only. Stomatology Edu Journal 93