Art of reading a journal article: Methodically and

effectively
Go to:

INTRODUCTION
“We are drowning in information but starved for knowledge.”
John Naisbitt

It has become essential for the clinicians, researchers, and students to read articles from scientific
journals. This is not only to keep abreast of progress in the speciality concerned but also to be
aware of current trends in providing optimum healthcare to the patients. Reading scientific
literature is a must for students interested in research, for choosing their topics and carrying out
their experiments. Scientific literature in that field will help one understand what has already
been discovered and what questions remain unanswered and thus help in designing one's
research project. Sackett (1981)[1] and Durbin (2009)[2] suggested various reasons why most of
us read journal articles and some of these are listed in Table 1.

Table 1
Common reasons for reading journal articles

The scientific literature is burgeoning at an exponential rate. Between 1978 and 1985, nearly
272,344 articles were published annually and listed in Medline. Between 1986 and 1993, this
number reached 344,303 articles per year, and between 1994 and 2001, the figure has grown to
398,778 articles per year.[3] To be updated with current knowledge, a physician practicing
general medicine has to read 17 articles a day, 365 days a year.[4]
In spite of the internet rapidly gaining a strong foothold as a quick source of obtaining
information, reading journal articles, whether from print or electronic media, still remains the
most common way of acquiring new information for most of us.[2] Newspaper reports or novels
can be read in an insouciant manner, but reading research reports and scientific articles requires
concentration and meticulous approach. At present, there are 1312 dentistry journals listed in
Pubmed.[5] How can one choose an article, read it purposefully, effectively, and systematically?
The aim of this article is to provide an answer to this question by presenting an efficient and
methodical approach to a scientific manuscript. However, the reader is informed that this paper is
mainly intended for the amateur reader unaccustomed to scientific literature and not for the
professional interested in critical appraisal of journal articles.
Go to:

TYPES OF JOURNAL ARTICLES

Different types of papers are published in medical and dental journals. One should be aware of
each kind; especially, when one is looking for a specific type of an article. Table 2 gives
different categories of papers published in journals.

Table 2
Types of articles published in a journal

In general, scientific literature can be primary or secondary. Reports of original research form the
“primary literature”, the “core” of scientific publications. These are the articles written to present
findings on new scientific discoveries or describe earlier work to acknowledge it and place new
findings in the proper perspective. “Secondary literature” includes review articles, books,
editorials, practice guidelines, and other forms of publication in which original research
information is reviewed.[6] An article published in a peer-reviewed journal is more valued than
one which is not.
An original research article should consist of the following headings: Structured abstract,
introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) and may be Randomized Control Trial
(RCT), Controlled Clinical Trial (CCT), Experiment, Survey, and Case-control or Cohort study.
Reviews could be non-systematic (narrative) or systematic. A narrative review is a broad
overview of a topic without any specific question, more or less an update, and qualitative
summary. On the other hand, a systematic review typically addresses a specific question about a
topic, details the methods by which papers were identified in the literature, uses predetermined
criteria for selection of papers to be included in the review, and qualitatively evaluates them. A
meta-analysis is a type of systematic review in which numeric results of several separate studies
are statistically combined to determine the outcome of a specific research question.[7–9] Some
are invited reviews, requested by the Editor, from an expert in a particular field of study.
A case study is a report of a single clinical case, whereas, a case series is a description of a
number of such cases. Case reports and case series are description of disease (s) generally
considered rare or report of heretofore unknown or unusual findings in a well-recognized
condition, unique procedure, imaging technique, diagnostic test, or treatment method. Technical
notes are description of new, innovative techniques, or modifications to existing procedures. A
pictorial essay is a teaching article with images and legends but has limited text. Commentary is
a short article on an author's personal opinion of a specific topic and could be controversial. An
editorial, written by the editor of the journal or invited, can be perspective (about articles
published in that particular issue) or persuasive (arguing a specific point of view). Other articles
published in a journal include letters to the editor, book reviews, conference proceedings and
abstracts, and abstracts from other journals.[10]
Go to:

WHAT TO READ IN A JOURNAL? – CHOOSING THE RIGHT ARTICLE

Not all research articles published are excellent, and it is pragmatic to decide if the quality of the
study warrants reading of the manuscript. The first step for a reader is to choose a right article for
reading, depending on one's individual requirement. The next step is to read the selected article
methodically and efficiently.[2] A simple decision-making flowchart is depicted in [Figure 1],
which helps one to decide the type of article to select. This flowchart is meant for one who has a
specific intent of choosing a particular type of article and not for one who intends to browse
through a journal.
Figure 1

Schematic flowchart of the first step in choosing an article to read

Go to:

HOW TO START READING AN ARTICLE?

“There is an art of reading, as well as an art of thinking, and an art of writing.”
Clarence Day

At first glance, a journal article might appear intimidating for some or confusing for others with
its tables and graphs. Reading a research article can be a frustrating experience, especially for the
one who has not mastered the art of reading scientific literature. Just like there is a method to
extract a tooth or prepare a cavity, one can also learn to read research articles by following a
systematic approach. Most scientific articles are organized as follows:[2,11]
1. Title: Topic and information about the authors.
2. Abstract: Brief overview of the article.
3. Introduction: Background information and statement of the research hypothesis.
4. Methods: Details of how the study was conducted, procedures followed, instruments used
and variables measured.
5. Results: All the data of the study along with figures, tables and/or graphs.
 6. Discussion: The interpretation of the results and implications of the study.
7. References/Bibliography: Citations of sources from where the information was obtained.
Review articles do not usually follow the above pattern, unless they are systematic reviews or
meta-analysis. The cardinal rule is: Never start reading an article from the beginning to the end.
It is better to begin by identifying the conclusions of the study by reading the title and the
abstract.[12] If the article does not have an abstract, read the conclusions or the summary at the
end of the article first. After reading the abstract or conclusions, if the reader deems it is
interesting or useful, then the entire article can be read [Figure 2].

Figure 2
Decision-making flowchart to decide whether to read the chosen article or not
Go to:

THE TITLE
Like the title of a movie which attracts a filmgoer, the title of the article is the one which attracts
a reader in the first place. A good title will inform the potential reader a great deal about the
study to decide whether to go ahead with the paper or dismiss it. Most readers prefer titles that
are descriptive and self-explanatory without having to look at the entire article to know what it is
all about.[2] For example, the paper entitled “Microwave processing – A blessing for
pathologists” gives an idea about the article in general to the reader. But there is no indication in
the title whether it is a review article on microwave processing or an original research. If the title
had been “Comparison of Microwave with Conventional Tissue Processing on quality of
histological sections”, even the insouciant reader would have a better understanding of the
content of the paper.
Go to:

ABSTRACT
Abstract helps us determine whether we should read the entire article or not. In fact, most
journals provide abstract free of cost online allowing us to decide whether we need to purchase
the entire article. Most scientific journals now have a structured abstract with separate
subheadings like introduction (background or hypothesis), methods, results and conclusions
making it easy for a reader to identify important parts of the study quickly.[13] Moreover, there
is usually a restriction about the number of words that can be included in an abstract. This makes
the abstract concise enough for one to read rapidly.
The abstract can be read in a systematic way by answering certain fundamental questions like
what was the study about, why and how was the study conducted, the results and their
inferences. The reader should make a note of any questions that were raised while reading the
abstract and be sure that answers have been found after reading the entire article.[12]

Reading the entire article

Once the reader has decided to read the entire article, one can begin with the introduction.
Go to:

INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the introduction is to provide the rationale for conducting the study. This section
usually starts with existing knowledge and previous research of the topic under consideration.
Typically, this section concludes with identification of gaps in the literature and how these gaps
stimulated the researcher to design a new study.[12] A good introduction should provide proper
background for the study. The aims and objectives are usually mentioned at the end of the
introduction. The reader should also determine whether a research hypothesis (study hypothesis)
was stated and later check whether it was answered under the discussion.
 Go to:

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This section gives the technical details of how the experiments were carried out. In most of the
research articles, all details are rarely included but there should be enough information to
understand how the study was carried out.[12] Information about the number of subjects
included in the study and their categorization, sampling methods, the inclusion criteria (who can
be in) and exclusion criteria (who cannot be in) and the variables chosen can be derived by
reading this section. The reader should get acquainted with the procedures and equipment used
for data collection and find out whether they were appropriate.
Go to:

RESULTS OF THE STUDY

In this section, the researchers give details about the data collected, either in the form of figures,
tables and/or graphs. Ideally, interpretation of data should not be reported in this section, though
statistical analyses are presented. The reader should meticulously go through this segment of the
manuscript and find out whether the results were reliable (same results over time) and valid
(measure what it is supposed to measure). An important aspect is to check if all the subjects
present in the beginning of the study were accounted for at the end of the study. If the answer is
no, the reader should check whether any explanation was provided.
Results that were statistically significant and results that were not, must be identified. One should
also observe whether a correct statistical test was employed for analysis and was the level of
significance appropriate for the study. To appreciate the choice of a statistical test, one requires
an understanding of the hypothesis being tested.[14,15] Table 3 provides a list of commonly used
statistical tests used in scientific publications. Description and interpretation of these tests is
beyond the scope of this paper. It is wise to remember the following advice: It is not only
important to know whether a difference or association is statistically significant but also
appreciate whether it is large or substantial enough to be useful clinically.[16] In other words,
what is statistically significant may not be clinically significant.