EPI 212: Publishing and Presenting Research (Spring 2018)
Section outline
-
-
Publishing & Presenting Clinical Research
EPI 212 Spring 2018 (1 unit).
Course Director: Alison Huang, MD, MAS
-
-
Lecture:
Introduction to Publishing & Presenting Research
and
Preparing Research Abstracts: Few Words, Big Impact
Faculty: Alison Huang, MD, MAS
Location: Mission Hall 1400This session will focus on preparing structured abstracts for scientific conferences as well as for full-length manuscripts. We will review strategies for crafting the introduction, methods, results, and conclusions of an abstract to highlight the strengths and significance of the research and adhere to rigorous reporting standards, while staying within required word or space limits. Examples of effective and ineffective abstract sections will be reviewed, with students being encouraged to critique examples and suggest improvements. We will also discuss factors that should be weighed in deciding when and where to submit an abstract; examine the process used to evaluate abstracts for poster, oral, or plenary meeting presentations; and discuss common mistakes that can result in abstract submissions receiving less consideration than they deserve.
-
Course Introduction and Preparing Abstracts slides File
-
Watch URL
-
Lara Varpio, et al. Writing competitive research conference abstracts. Medical Education 2006; File
-
Lecture:
Grace Under Fire: Oral and Poster Research Presentations
and
Good Beginnings: the Introduction and Methods Sections of Manuscripts
Faculty: Alison Huang, MD, MAS
Location: Mission Hall 1400The first half of this session will focus on giving oral and poster research presentations as well as discussing one's overall scientific mission at professional meetings. We will examine strategies for creating visually appealing slides and posters, preparing talking points that complement visual content without being overshadowed by it, and responding to questions and criticisms during presentations.
The second half will focus on the introduction and methods sections of research manuscripts. We will discuss how to write an introduction that offers a compelling rationale for the research and provides necessary contextual information to frame the research goals, while staying within space limits. We will also discuss how to prepare a methods section that provides all critical information about the design and implementation of a study and anticipates readers' questions about the conduct of the research, while avoiding unnecessary detail.
-
Lecture slides: Oral and Poster Presentations File
-
Lecture slides: Good Beginnings and Endings File
-
Watch URL
-
Manuscript Preparation and Publication" by David Holmes, et al. in Careers in Circulation, 2009;120:906-913 File
-
Lecture:
Research Results: the Visual Display of Data
and
Public Medical Writing: Communicating with the Public, Policy Makers, and Funders
Faculty: Vivek Jain. MD, MAS and Louise Aronson, MD
Location: Mission Hall 1400The first half of this session (led by Dr. Vivek Jain) will focus on preparing visually compelling tables, graphs, and figures to present research data. We will consider examples of more and less effective presentation of research tables and figures and discuss strategies for improving the format or presentation. We will also review tips for developing written text that frames and/or highlights the visual display of research data.
The second half of the session (led by Dr. Louise Aronson) will focus on preparing articles for "public" audiences. Researchers who have the greatest impact on healthcare, patient lives, and the medical system often write both for professional colleagues and for the public, policy makers, potential funders, and health system leaders. Opinion and story-based articles are among the most effective ways to reach wider audiences and have significant, real-world impact. This session will introduce the four main types of public articles-- thought pieces, perspectives, narratives, and op-eds. We will dissect sample articles of each type to identify keys to their success and discuss how to determine the right article type, audience, and approach for your research goals.
-
Presenting Research Data slides File
-
Writing for the Public File
-
Watch URL
-
Excerpts from Edward Tufte’s The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. File
-
Dahlstrom M. Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with non-experts. File
-
Aronson L. Stories as Evidence, Evidence as Stories. File
-
Meisel ZF, Karlawish J. Narrative vs evidence-based medicine–And, not or. File
-
Steiner JF. The use of stories in clinical research and health policy. File
-
Lecture:
Good Endings: the Results and Discussion Sections of Research Manuscripts
and
Being Newsworthy: Sharing your Study Results with the Lay Press
Faculty: Alison Huang, MD, MAS; Margot Kushel, MD; and Laura Kurtzmann
Location: Mission Hall 1400The first half of this session will focus on preparing results discussion sections for research manuscripts. We will examine strategies for drafting results and discussion sections that highlight the most important study findings without restating information from the results, acknowledge the limitations of the research without undermining its strengths, and guide readers in interpreting study findings in the context of previous work.
The second half of this session (led by Dr. Margot Kushel) will focus on strategies for disseminating study results in the lay press, including working with university media officers to prepare concise but engaging press releases, summarizing study results in a way that is both scientifically appropriate and easy for lay audiences to digest, and addressing subsequent questions, interview requests, and comments from reporters, media outlets, and the public. We will discuss how to decide whether a study is "newsworthy", when to start preparing a press release for a study, and how to respond to time-sensitive media inquiries about their research.
-
Lecture slides--Good Endings File
-
Lecture slides-- Being Newsworthy File
-
Kwok R. Communication: Two minutes to impress, Nature, 494, 137-138 (2013) doi:10.1038/nj7435-137a URL
-
Lecture:
Running the Gauntlet: the Manuscript Review Process
and
Special Editor-in-Chief and Senior Editor Roundtable
Faculty: Alison Huang. MD, MAS
Journal editor roundtable: (Andrew Auerbach, MD; Kenneth Covinsky, MD; Stephen McLeod, MD; Sue Yom, MD, PhD; Charles Irwin, Jr., MD)
Location: Mission Hall 1400
The final session will address the manuscript submission and review process, including expectations for acceptance versus rejection for initial and resubmitted manuscripts, insights into the perspective of reviewers who critique manuscript submissions, and strategies for responding to reviewer critiques in order to increase the likelihood of acceptance. The majority of the session will take the form of a special, interactive "editor-in-chief roundtable" in which a panel of five UCSF professors who are also editors-in-chief or deputy editors at major peer-reviewed medical and scientific journals will be asked to speak briefly in response to several pre-established questions (see below), in addition to taking additional questions from students.
Possible questions:
- "In your experience, what is one of the most common mistakes made by authors in preparing or submitting research manuscripts that result in their manuscripts not being given the consideration they deserve?"
- "Can you think of an example of a manuscript that was turned down by your journal that you feel should have been accepted, or an example of one that was accepted that you think should have been rejected, and explain why?"
- "Aside from the reviewers' critiques, what other factors do you as a journal editor weigh in deciding whether to accept or reject a manuscript?"
- "Are there circumstances in which it may be appropriate or feasible for an author to appeal a decision to reject made by a journal; if so, what are they, and how should authors go about this?"
-
The Manuscript Submission and Review Process File
-
Preparing Reports for Publication and Responding to Reviewers’ Comments" by Gordon H. Guyatt and R. Brian Haynes, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2006;59:900-906 File