Abstract Write-Up recommendation.
·
Write this section at the end of all other
sections, but place this at the beginning of your report.
·
Abstract should not be more than 300 words.
·
You are required to write a structured abstract
that uses subheadings (Introduction, Method, Result, Conclusion)
·
As most readers will only read the abstract, it
is important to craft your abstract so that it communicates the essential
information within the word limit.
·
The abstract must stand alone. It must tell the
reader why the topic is important, what the researchers did, what they found
out (the most important results and data from the study), and how these
findings contribute to knowledge.
·
Do not cite references or use abbreviations.
Introduction (around 500 words max):
Organize
your introduction as below:
A paragraph on why you have chosen the term paper topic
A paragraph on the knowledge gap you are addressing, This
is also your rationale for your study
A paragraph (1-2 sentences) specifying the goal and
objectives of your review/paper
Methods (around 400-500 words):
·
Search terms development and database used (only
PubMed database for your case). Make this your Figure 1
·
Say about the database and if you have any
restrictions in search (e.g., children, timeframe, English language)
·
Create a flow chart that will be your Figure 2
o
Start with how many articles you got from the
literature search
o
Exclusion based on different eligibility
criteria (e.g., you looked only at epidemiological study, age group) to get
your required 10 papers. You may list your eligibility criteria as Table 1
o
Some of the eligibility criteria may be (this
could be different for different topic): 1) epidemiological studies that report
point estimates and 95% confidence intervals, 2) human studies, 3) no
toxicological studies, 4) English language only, 5) if you are doing a scoping
review only, you can select review paper also, 6) If you are doing a scoping
review, please exclude any systematic review or meta-analysis paper, and 7)
published between January 01, 2000, and October 31, 2023.
o
List Final articles used in your review
o
If you have taken any steps to get the full
article (e.g., request UofM library) ILLiad –
Article Request (memphis.edu)
·
Data extraction (e.g., Buchan et. al. page e525)
§
Create a table/spreadsheet with different
variables (e.g., first author, year of publication, study title, study design,
country of origin, list the environmental exposure/stressor, source of
environmental exposure, mean concentrations in the environment, route of
environmental exposure, primary outcome measure, sample size, human subject
approval, research Question, health outcomes, measures of disease/outcome
frequency, study design, statistical analyses, adjustment by confounders, , satistical
significance for all outcomes, interpretation, measures of disease association (e.g.,
odds ratio, risk ratio), statistical significance, and any other variables of
interest
§
This spreadsheet can you used as your Table 2
Maintain the chronology of
steps
Results (around 400-500 words):
·
Based on Table 2
·
Describe the findings of your search in the texts
and numbers. The numbers need to match exactly for your flow chart or Figure 1
·
Summarize your Table 2 in texts and numbers
o
Summarize study characteristics (e.g., county or
origin, types of study, study design)
o
Summarize environmental exposure
o
Summarize the health outcomes
o
Summarize the statistical analyses
o
Summarize the measures of disease association
o
Summarize statistical significance
Discussion (around 600 words):
· There
is a difference between “Results” and “Discussion”
· In
“Results”, you only write texts and highlight numbers based on your “Table 2”.
There may not be able to interpret your results in the “Result” section
· You
can interpret in the “Discussion”
· Start
with summarizing the findings of your result in a paragraph. This could be 3-5
sentences.
·
There could be many aspects of your results that
you want to interpret or elaborate. Use no more than three paragraphs for this
interpretation and elaboration. Cite other newspaper articles/literature/online
resources with similar or different or relevant findings during your interpretation.
· Add
one sentence about the strength and weaknesses of all studies included in your
review (e.g., measurement error, bias, sample size, statistical method,
non-generalizable study population)
· One
paragraph on conclusion and recommendation
