See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/284896658

Writing the Discussion Section: Describing the Significance of the Study

Findings

Article  in  The Journal of the Association of Physicians of India · November 2015

CITATIONS READS

6 18,407

1 author:

Sandeep B Bavdekar

187 PUBLICATIONS   1,686 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Sandeep B Bavdekar on 12 July 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

40 Journal of The Association of Physicians of India ■ Vol. 63 ■ November 2015

Art of Writing

Writing the Discussion Section: Describing the

Significance of the Study Findings
Sandeep B Bavdekar

findings (3) . Some find it prudent

Abstract to re-state the purpose of the
The Discussion section is an important part of the research manuscript study, using a terminology similar
to that used in the Introduction
that allows the authors to showcase the study. It is used to interpret
section and answering the question
the results for readers, describe the virtues and limitations of the study,
raised in the introduction. This
discuss the theoretical and practical implications of the research work
is an acceptable reiteration, as
done and provide important “take home” message.
the Introduction and Discussion
section are separated by other
sections. While describing the gist

T he Discussion section of a
paper intends to convey what
the findings of the study mean
The Structure
The beginning: Most authors
of the results, the authors must
include all important observations.
They must report on the primary
and hence has been likened to prefer to begin this section by outcome, irrespective of the fact
the closing arguments put forth providing a summary of the key whether these are in line with the
by counselors in a court case. It findings in the study. Such a stated hypothesis or not.
is the last chance for an author to summary offers context to the
The next part of the Discussion
“sell” his paper. The discussion debates and arguments that follow.
should be devoted to interpreting
section should be written in a In addition, there are readers; who
the results, citing the strengths
focused manner getting straight to after reading the title (do not read
and limitations of the study, and
answering the research question the methodology or the Results
listing the implications of the
raised in the introduction section. sections, but) straightaway go
study findings in the light of
Such a direct approach is likely to the Discussion section to find
whole evidence. This should begin
to make a lasting impression on out the implications of the study
with comparing and contrasting
the minds of the readers. The findings. These readers need to
the study results with those of
discussion section is considered be provided with a gist of results,
other relevant studies. However,
harder to define as compared to to enhance their understanding of
it is advisable for authors to desist
the other sections of the research the discussion. However, it must
from providing a detailed critique
paper. While other sections be remembered that there is no
of each and every study on the
require orderly and simple logical reason to provide details of all
topic. Studies with similar as
writing; composing discussion observations, as the readers who
well as differing results should
section requires logical thinking, are interested in such detailed
be cited. The possible reasons
reflection and critical appraisal. accounts have a whole section
for differences in the results
A well-written discussion section dedicated to study findings. Some
can then be discussed (3) . Getting
includes a statement of important p refer to b eg in t he discussion
results that are different from
results, reference to previously section by stating the important
previously conducted studies does
p u b l i s h e d r e l e va n t l i t e r a t u r e , conclusions of the study, while
not necessarily mean that there
comparison of study results with there are others, who prefer to
has been some error or mistake
previously reported findings, begin the section by narrating why
in conducting the study. It could
explanation of results, elucidations the study is special or unique and
simply be due to differences in
of strengths and weaknesses of the then go on to discuss the study
the populations studied. It is also
study, interpretation of the whole
evidence, description of impact of
the study and recommendations for Professor and Head, Dept. of Pediatrics, Topiwala National Medical College and BYL Nair Ch. Hospital, Mumbai,
the future course of action. Maharashtra
Received: 18.07.2015; Accepted: 28.07.2015
 Journal of The Association of Physicians of India ■ Vol. 63 ■ November 2015 41

Table 1: Common pitfalls idea about the limitations of their

Pitfall Corrective Action study. It is better for the authors to
Providing results in great detail A gist of results is enough to provide context for the point out the possible weaknesses
discussion that follows such as sources of imprecision and
Discussing observations not reported Only observations reported in the Results section sources, magnitude and directions
in the Results section should be discussed of potential bias. They can also
Avoiding discussion on unexpected Discuss unexpected results and try and explain results elaborate on the efforts taken to
results not in line with the hypothesis. Be honest. These could
minimize these errors and maybe
stimulate further research
Same or similar information is Introduction and Discussion sections should
even clarify why they could
provided in introduction and complement each other (Table 2). It is necessary that not be eliminated or controlled
discussion sections arguments begun in Introduction are followed through further. The authors can then go
in the discussion section, but repetition of ideas and on to discuss the impact of these
arguments should be avoided.
limitations on the study findings
Long, wordy arguments that meander Use focused arguments
and argue how the results can still
Using discussion section to provide Compare study findings with those from recent,
historical details or irrelevant relevant high-quality studies in order to hold the be considered valid in spite of the
information. Comparing study readers’ attention. listed limitations.
findings all the studies done on the
After having presented the
subject.
whole evidence (from the previous
Not listing study limitations Not a good idea. Reviewers will point to them out,
anyway studies and the current study)
Conclusions not supported by the Avoid drawing conclusions that are not backed by and having critically analyzed
data or over-inflating the importance data. Always provide a balanced and honest viewpoint. the study quality (in terms of
or ‘generalizability’ of the study limitations and strengths); the
findings
authors should may then provide a
Speculating too much or too little Discussion section should be used for predicting how
results would impact practice, health policy and future
balanced interpretation of the whole
research. Such predictions help readers understand evidence, citing what the study has
the value of the research study. But exaggerations and added to the current knowledge and
excessive speculation should be avoided as it would how it has enhanced understanding
bring discredit.
of the subject. They then need
possible that the differences were for screening or diagnosis, enrolled to discuss the generalizability
because of a more sensitive or an appropriately large participant ( va l i d i t y a n d a p p l i c a b i l i t y ) o f
specific test used in the current population (adequate sample size), the study findings and based on
study. The authors can also ensured a higher compliance and the totality of evidence should
attempt to explore the possible lower drop-out rates or used an state if and how clinical practice
mechanisms or explanation for the objectively assessed and clinically (diagnostics, therapy or preventive
study findings. If there have been r e l e va n t e n d p o i n t , o r u t i l i z e d strategy) and/ or health policy
some unexpected findings, these various effective methods to needs to change. While reporting
should be reported honestly and an minimize bias. on these aspects, care should be
attempt should be made to explain Many newly-initiated authors taken to ensure that the conclusions
their occurrence, if possible. These t e n d t o s h y a wa y f r o m l i s t i n g are based on the study data, and
findings could sow the seeds of limitations in the study thinking the importance of the study is not
future exploration and research. that if they point out weaknesses exaggerated. The last paragraph
The authors can then describe in their study, the probability of of the section should show-case
h o w t h e s t u d y wa s u n i q u e o r manuscript being rejected would be the study, stating clearly whether
different and what were the higher. This is far from the truth. It the study findings support the
strengths and limitations of the is well to remember that no study hypothesis or not. The authors
study. The strengths could be is perfect and that every study has can also list the new questions
related to objectives of the study, one or the other limitation. In any and controversies raised by the
participant characteristics or case, the editors invite experts to study and explore implications of
conduct of study. For example, review the manuscripts. In such a the study findings for the clinical
the present study may have had situation, these expert reviewers are practice and future research.
a better choice of the research anyway going to identify and point
question, a stringent selection of out the weaknesses in the study.
Pitfalls to Avoid
an appropriate study population, And then they would have the Discussion section needs to be
or an intervention similar to that impression that the investigators written with great care and thought,
used in the medical practice. In have planned and executed the as it informs the reader about the
addition, it might have employed a study and are now reporting the significance of the study. And it
more sensitive or more specific test study findings without having any is necessary that authors plan it
42 Journal of The Association of Physicians of India ■ Vol. 63 ■ November 2015

Table 2: Comparison between the Introduction and Discussion sections the evidence generated by earlier
Introduction Section Discussion Section studies at a glance.
Purpose To help reader understand To help reader interpret the results and To summarize, discussion
the need to conduct the understand the implications of the study section is considered to be the
research study findings
most important section of a
Research Question Narrates the hypothesis or Provides answer to the research question
the research question and states if the study findings support
research manuscript, as it puts the
the hypothesis study findings in an appropriate
Contents Information about the Summary of study findings, explanation p e r s p e c t i ve a n d d e s c r i b e s t h e
current state of knowledge, of study findings, comparison with contribution made by and the
enlisting knowledge gaps, available evidence, enlisting strengths and significance of the study. Many a
importance of bridging weaknesses of the study, interpretation times, it decides if the manuscript
the knowledge gap and of the whole evidence, discussion on the
stating the hypothesis or the external validity and impact of the study will be accepted for publication or
research question findings and recommendations for future not. Hence, it is necessary for the
course of action authors to plan it well, and write it
Flow and From general information to From specific study findings to in a focused manner describing the
Organization specific study objectives implications for the relevant general
significance and importance of the
population
study findings.
well. Before beginning to write to the instructions to authors that
the section, the authors should journals provide. Though most References
have a good grasp of literature on journals do not specify a page limit
1. Annesley TM. The Discussion Section:
the subject including the recently or word count limit for discussion, Your Closing Argument. Clin Chem 2010;
generated evidence. Although they it is imperative that the overall 56:1066671-4.
may have read several studies, they word count limit advised for the 2. Garcia Santos JM. How to write an original
need to choose what literature to manuscript is adhered to and article in a biomedical journal. Radiologia
quote and which studies’ findings all unnecessary sentences (and 2011; 53:209-19.
to compare. They should choose even words) are edited out from 3. Markovich H. Discussion. In: Hall GM (ed.)
high-quality relevant studies for the Discussion. As with most How to Write a Paper 3rd edition, New Delhi,
comparison. They should never other sections, active voice should Byword Viva Publishers Private Limited, Pp
36-41.
lose focus and provide unnecessary predominate, though a mix of
4. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT
historical details. It is important active voice with a few sentences
Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated
that authors avoid pitfalls listed in in passive voice are welcome. It is guidelines for reporting parallel group
Table 1. Since introduction section better to be direct and concise while randomised trials. BMJ Medicine 2010; 8:18.
contains information based on making a point. Tables and figures 5. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ,
current knowledge on the basis are rarely used to depict what the Gotzsche PC, Vandenbrouche JP, for the
o f p u b l i sh e d l i t e r a t u r e a n d a s authors wish to convey. This is STROBE Group. Int J Surg 2014; 12:1495-9.
study findings are compared with understandable since discussion 6. International Committee of Medical
those reported in literature in the mainly deals with exchange of ideas, Journal Editors (ICMJE). Recommendations
discussion section, there is a risk of views and opinions. However, for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and
Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical
similar information finding place sometimes figures are used to
Journals. Updated December 2014. http://
in these two sections. This can elucidate complex mechanisms. www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.
be minimized and even avoided Tables are used (not infrequently) pdf [Last accessed on August 22, 2015].
by remembering the purpose and for depicting information culled 7. Ng KH, Peh WCG. Writing the Disucssion.
context of these two sections (Table from many sources. Tables showing Singapore Med J 2009; 50:438-60.
2). details of previous studies allow
Authors should pay due attention readers to grasp and understand

View publication stats