MediclinicResearch Hub
RESEARCH ACADEMY · PROCEDURAL GUIDE

Writing a Manuscript

A structured workflow for converting completed research into a transparent paper that matches the study design and journal.

7 sections · Procedural guidance

Before writing

  • Confirm the analysis is final and the manuscript reflects the approved protocol.
  • Choose the correct reporting guideline and download its checklist.
  • Agree authorship and contributions using current ICMJE principles.
  • Confirm all approval, consent, registration, funding and conflict-of-interest statements.
  • Select a realistic target journal and read its author instructions.

Recommended drafting order

1

Tables and figures

Create the minimum set that tells the results story. Each should stand on its own with clear labels, denominators and units.

2

Methods

Write what was actually done: design, setting, participants, variables/interventions, approvals, data, bias control, sample size and analysis. It should be reproducible.

3

Results

Follow the prespecified objectives. Start with participant flow and baseline/descriptive information, then primary outcome, secondary outcomes, harms and sensitivity/exploratory analyses. Do not interpret results here beyond necessary factual description.

4

Introduction

Usually three moves: what is known, what gap remains, and the exact objective/hypothesis of this study.

5

Discussion

Open with the principal finding, compare with existing evidence, explain plausible interpretations, describe strengths/limitations and finish with a proportionate conclusion.

6

Abstract and title

Write last so they accurately reflect the final paper. Identify the design where the reporting guideline recommends it.

7

Declarations and supplementary material

Add ethics approval, consent, registration, funding, conflicts, author contributions, data availability and reporting checklist.

Authorship

Current ICMJE recommendations require substantive contribution, participation in drafting/revision, final approval and accountability. Acquisition of funding, general supervision or seniority alone does not automatically justify authorship. Decide contributions early and update them if roles change.

Final manuscript audit

  • Title/abstract match actual design.
  • All denominators consistent across text/tables/figures.
  • Primary outcome matches protocol/registration.
  • No unreported outcome switching.
  • Effect estimates include precision.
  • Limitations are specific, not generic.
  • Ethics/consent/registration wording accurate.
  • Authorship/contributions agreed.
  • Reporting checklist completed.
  • References verified against claims.

What belongs in each IMRaD section

  • Introduction: scientific context, unresolved gap and exact objective—usually no results and no long historical review.
  • Methods: enough operational detail to understand sampling, measurement, bias control, approvals and analysis; cite a protocol where appropriate but do not omit essential methods simply because they exist elsewhere.
  • Results: participant flow, descriptive data, primary results, secondary/sensitivity analyses and harms; give denominators and precision.
  • Discussion: principal findings, comparison with literature, interpretation, strengths/limitations, implications and conclusion.
  • Supplement: detailed searches, extra analyses, questionnaires, code lists, protocols or additional tables when the journal permits.

Editing pass

  1. Accuracy pass: every number matches source output.
  2. Consistency pass: terminology, denominators and outcome names are identical across abstract, text, tables and figures.
  3. Claim pass: every strong statement is supported and causal language matches design.
  4. Reporting-guideline pass: every applicable checklist item has a manuscript location.
  5. Privacy pass: no unnecessary identifiers, dates or clinical images remain.
  6. Journal pass: formatting, word count, declarations and file requirements are complete.

Primary standards and sources