STOMATOLOGY EDU JOURNAL 2017, Volume 4, Issue 2 2 | Page 26

DENTAL EDUCATION

Original Articles

HOW TO SET UP , CONDUCT AND REPORT A SCIENTIFIC STUDY
Jean-François Roulet 1a *
1
Department of Restorative Dental Sciences , College of Dentistry , University of Florida , Gainesville , FL-32610 , USA a
Dr med dent ., Dr hc , Prof hc , Professor , Director of Center for Dental Biomaterials
Received : March 27 , 2017 Revised : April 24 , 2017 Accepted : May 24 , 2017 Published : May 29 , 2017
Academic Editor : Adrian Podoleanu , Eng , PhD , Professor , FInstP , FOSA , FSPIE , Professor of Biomedical Optics , Head of the Applied Optics Group , School of Physical Sciences , University of Kent , Canterbury , Kent , UK
Cite this article : Cite this article : Roulet J-F . How to set up , conduct and report a scientific study . Stoma Edu J . 2017 ; 4 ( 2 ): 90-101 .
ABSTRACT DOI : 10.25241 / stomaeduj . 2017.4 ( 2 ). art . 1
This continuing education paper gives some guidelines on how to write a scientific paper . A good paper begins with a high quality experiment ! Therefore , based on an idea , authors should first inform themselves by reading the literature , refine their idea and convert it into a scientific question . This is all laid down in the first draft of the “ Introduction ” of the future paper . The authors must seek for ways to answer the scientific question stated above , which is done by describing it in detail in the “ Material & Methods ” section of the paper . This may require a pilot study . Once the experimental design , the parameters to be measured and the materials involved are known , it is good practice to consult a statistician in order to determine the statistical method to be used for analyzing the results . The execution phase is dominated by meticulously applying the methods described above and documenting everything in detail . Once results are obtained , they should be first displayed in a descriptive manner to determine the final quantitative analysis , which leads to tables and figures showing the significant differences . What is left at this point is to write a “ Discussion ”, which should be well structured and then to compile the whole manuscript in the format required by the journal of choice to submit to . Finally some hints are given how to successfully deal with reviewers . Conclusion : Following the recommendations given , the probability to obtain acceptance of a paper may be quite good . Keywords : experimental design , scientific writing , publishing .
1 . Introduction Performing a scientific study is basically the same as running a project . Therefore all rules regarding project management apply to scientific studies as well . Most projects , especially larger and more complex ones are run by teams . In teams the individual players which are unified to achieve the same common objective ( successful completion of the given task ) give up some of their individuality and at the same time bring in their competence . To guarantee the well functioning of the team , each member should comply to commonly defined rules . Most of these rules govern compliance and communication . For me the most basic rule is the following : “ I say what I think and I do what I say ”. In scientific projects usually a multitude of players are involved , especially in a teaching institution . Researchers interact with other researchers , with students , lab technicians , statisticians , administrators , and industrial partners or grant administrators etc . Therefore , to be successful , open and straightforward communication is indispensable as well as the establishment of a framework in which the team is able to perform . An analysis of successful and failed projects reveals several general patterns 1 ( Fig 1 ). A plot of resources spent versus times revealed that most of the effort in successful projects is spent at the beginning of the process . 1 This means that the information is properly collected , the objectives are well defined , everything has been thought through as well as possible based on the actual knowledge and the task ahead is well defined . Then the “ machine ” can be started and the project runs as perceived in the creative phase . During the execution phase usually the effort diminishes and the preplanned tasks can be accomplished without surprises . In product development I have learned that following a well thought and structured scaffold is a good strategy for success . On the other hand , projects that have failed show a pattern that is quite different . With a brilliant idea the project is just started with the anticipation that it will work . So the start is nice , because without too much effort the project is moving forward , usually with lots of enthusiasm . However , when the project is usually on
* Corresponding author : Dr med dent ., Dr hc , Prof hc , Professor , Jean-François Roulet , Director of Center for Dental Biomaterials Department of Restorative Dental Sciences , College of Dentistry , University of Florida , 1395 Center Drive , Room D9-6 , PO Box 100415 , Gainesville FL-32610-0415 , USA Tel / Fax : + 1 352 672 2599 , e-mail : jroulet @ dental . ufl . edu

90 Stoma Edu J . 2017 ; 4 ( 2 ): 90-101 http :// www . stomaeduj . com