how to read research papers course

• Make an Appointment
• Study Connect
• Request Workshop

Plan, Prioritize, Pass!

Get ready for finals with the arc.

How to read and understand a scientific paper

How to read and understand a scientific paper: a guide for non-scientists, london school of economics and political science, jennifer raff.

From vaccinations to climate change, getting science wrong has very real consequences. But journal articles, a primary way science is communicated in academia, are a different format to newspaper articles or blogs and require a level of skill and undoubtedly a greater amount of patience. Here  Jennifer Raff   has prepared a helpful guide for non-scientists on how to read a scientific paper. These steps and tips will be useful to anyone interested in the presentation of scientific findings and raise important points for scientists to consider with their own writing practice.

My post,  The truth about vaccinations: Your physician knows more than the University of Google  sparked a very lively discussion, with comments from several people trying to persuade me (and the other readers) that  their  paper disproved everything that I’d been saying. While I encourage you to go read the comments and contribute your own, here I want to focus on the much larger issue that this debate raised: what constitutes scientific authority?

It’s not just a fun academic problem. Getting the science wrong has very real consequences. For example, when a community doesn’t vaccinate children because they’re afraid of “toxins” and think that prayer (or diet, exercise, and “clean living”) is enough to prevent infection, outbreaks happen.

“Be skeptical. But when you get proof, accept proof.” –Michael Specter

What constitutes enough proof? Obviously everyone has a different answer to that question. But to form a truly educated opinion on a scientific subject, you need to become familiar with current research in that field. And to do that, you have to read the “primary research literature” (often just called “the literature”). You might have tried to read scientific papers before and been frustrated by the dense, stilted writing and the unfamiliar jargon. I remember feeling this way!  Reading and understanding research papers is a skill which every single doctor and scientist has had to learn during graduate school.  You can learn it too, but like any skill it takes patience and practice.

I want to help people become more scientifically literate, so I wrote this guide for how a layperson can approach reading and understanding a scientific research paper. It’s appropriate for someone who has no background whatsoever in science or medicine, and based on the assumption that he or she is doing this for the purpose of getting a  basic  understanding of a paper and deciding whether or not it’s a reputable study.

The type of scientific paper I’m discussing here is referred to as a  primary research article . It’s a peer-reviewed report of new research on a specific question (or questions). Another useful type of publication is a  review article . Review articles are also peer-reviewed, and don’t present new information, but summarize multiple primary research articles, to give a sense of the consensus, debates, and unanswered questions within a field.  (I’m not going to say much more about them here, but be cautious about which review articles you read. Remember that they are only a snapshot of the research at the time they are published.  A review article on, say, genome-wide association studies from 2001 is not going to be very informative in 2013. So much research has been done in the intervening years that the field has changed considerably).

Before you begin: some general advice

Reading a scientific paper is a completely different process than reading an article about science in a blog or newspaper. Not only do you read the sections in a different order than they’re presented, but you also have to take notes, read it multiple times, and probably go look up other papers for some of the details. Reading a single paper may take you a very long time at first. Be patient with yourself. The process will go much faster as you gain experience.

Most primary research papers will be divided into the following sections: Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, and Conclusions/Interpretations/Discussion. The order will depend on which journal it’s published in. Some journals have additional files (called Supplementary Online Information) which contain important details of the research, but are published online instead of in the article itself (make sure you don’t skip these files).

Before you begin reading, take note of the authors and their institutional affiliations. Some institutions (e.g. University of Texas) are well-respected; others (e.g.  the Discovery Institute ) may appear to be legitimate research institutions but are actually agenda-driven.  Tip:  g oogle  “Discovery Institute” to see why you don’t want to use it as a scientific authority on evolutionary theory.

Also take note of the journal in which it’s published. Reputable (biomedical) journals will be indexed by  Pubmed . [EDIT: Several people have reminded me that non-biomedical journals won’t be on Pubmed, and they’re absolutely correct! (thanks for catching that, I apologize for being sloppy here). Check out  Web of Science  for a more complete index of science journals. And please feel free to share other resources in the comments!]  Beware of  questionable journals .

As you read, write down  every single word  that you don’t understand. You’re going to have to look them all up (yes, every one. I know it’s a total pain. But you won’t understand the paper if you don’t understand the vocabulary. Scientific words have extremely precise meanings).

Step-by-step instructions for reading a primary research article

1. Begin by reading the introduction, not the abstract.

The abstract is that dense first paragraph at the very beginning of a paper. In fact, that’s often the only part of a paper that many non-scientists read when they’re trying to build a scientific argument. (This is a terrible practice—don’t do it.).  When I’m choosing papers to read, I decide what’s relevant to my interests based on a combination of the title and abstract. But when I’ve got a collection of papers assembled for deep reading, I always read the abstract last. I do this because abstracts contain a succinct summary of the entire paper, and I’m concerned about inadvertently becoming biased by the authors’ interpretation of the results.

2. Identify the BIG QUESTION.

Not “What is this paper about”, but “What problem is this entire field trying to solve?”

This helps you focus on why this research is being done.  Look closely for evidence of agenda-motivated research.

3. Summarize the background in five sentences or less.

Here are some questions to guide you:

What work has been done before in this field to answer the BIG QUESTION? What are the limitations of that work? What, according to the authors, needs to be done next?

The five sentences part is a little arbitrary, but it forces you to be concise and really think about the context of this research. You need to be able to explain why this research has been done in order to understand it.

4.   Identify the SPECIFIC QUESTION(S)

What  exactly  are the authors trying to answer with their research? There may be multiple questions, or just one. Write them down.  If it’s the kind of research that tests one or more null hypotheses, identify it/them.

Not sure what a null hypothesis is? Go read this one  and try to identify the null hypotheses in it. Keep in mind that not every paper will test a null hypothesis.

5. Identify the approach

What are the authors going to do to answer the SPECIFIC QUESTION(S)?

6. Now read the methods section. Draw a diagram for each experiment, showing exactly what the authors did.

I mean  literally  draw it. Include as much detail as you need to fully understand the work.  As an example, here is what I drew to sort out the methods for a paper I read today ( Battaglia et al. 2013: “The first peopling of South America: New evidence from Y-chromosome haplogroup Q” ). This is much less detail than you’d probably need, because it’s a paper in my specialty and I use these methods all the time.  But if you were reading this, and didn’t happen to know what “process data with reduced-median method using Network” means, you’d need to look that up.

Image credit: author

You don’t need to understand the methods in enough detail to replicate the experiment—that’s something reviewers have to do—but you’re not ready to move on to the results until you can explain the basics of the methods to someone else.

7.   Read the results section. Write one or more paragraphs to summarize the results for each experiment, each figure, and each table. Don’t yet try to decide what the results  mean , just write down what they  are.

You’ll find that, particularly in good papers, the majority of the results are summarized in the figures and tables. Pay careful attention to them!  You may also need to go to the Supplementary Online Information file to find some of the results.

 It is at this point where difficulties can arise if statistical tests are employed in the paper and you don’t have enough of a background to understand them. I can’t teach you stats in this post, but  here , and here   are some basic resources to help you.  I STRONGLY advise you to become familiar with them.

Things to pay attention to in the results section:

• Any time the words “significant” or “non-significant” are used. These have precise statistical meanings. Read more about this  here .
• If there are graphs, do they have  error bars  on them? For certain types of studies, a lack of confidence intervals is a major red flag.
• The sample size. Has the study been conducted on 10, or 10,000 people? (For some research purposes, a sample size of 10 is sufficient, but for most studies larger is better).

8. Do the results answer the SPECIFIC QUESTION(S)? What do you think they mean?

Don’t move on until you have thought about this. It’s okay to change your mind in light of the authors’ interpretation—in fact you probably will if you’re still a beginner at this kind of analysis—but it’s a really good habit to start forming your own interpretations before you read those of others.

9. Read the conclusion/discussion/Interpretation section.

What do the authors think the results mean? Do you agree with them? Can you come up with any alternative way of interpreting them? Do the authors identify any weaknesses in their own study? Do you see any that the authors missed? (Don’t assume they’re infallible!) What do they propose to do as a next step? Do you agree with that?

10. Now, go back to the beginning and read the abstract.

Does it match what the authors said in the paper? Does it fit with your interpretation of the paper?

11. FINAL STEP:  (Don’t neglect doing this)  What do other researchers say about this paper?

Who are the (acknowledged or self-proclaimed) experts in this particular field? Do they have criticisms of the study that you haven’t thought of, or do they generally support it?

Here’s a place where I do recommend you use google! But do it last, so you are better prepared to think critically about what other people say.

(12. This step may be optional for you, depending on why you’re reading a particular paper. But for me, it’s critical! I go through the “Literature cited” section to see what other papers the authors cited. This allows me to better identify the important papers in a particular field, see if the authors cited my own papers (KIDDING!….mostly), and find sources of useful ideas or techniques.)

UPDATE: If you would like to see an example of how to read a science paper using this framework, you can find one  here .

I gratefully acknowledge Professors José Bonner and Bill Saxton for teaching me how to critically read and analyze scientific papers using this method. I’m honored to have the chance to pass along what they taught me.

I’ve written a shorter version of this guide for teachers to hand out to their classes. If you’d like a PDF, shoot me an email: jenniferraff (at) utexas (dot) edu. For further comments and additional questions on this guide, please see the Comments Section on  the original post .

This piece originally appeared on the  author’s personal blog  and is reposted with permission.

Featured image credit:  Scientists in a laboratory of the University of La Rioja  by  Urcomunicacion  (Wikimedia CC BY3.0)

Note: This article gives the views of the authors, and not the position of the LSE Impact blog, nor of the London School of Economics. Please review our  Comments Policy  if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

Jennifer Raff (Indiana University—dual Ph.D. in genetics and bioanthropology) is an assistant professor in the Department of Anthropology, University of Kansas, director and Principal Investigator of the KU Laboratory of Human Population Genomics, and assistant director of KU’s Laboratory of Biological Anthropology. She is also a research affiliate with the University of Texas anthropological genetics laboratory. She is keenly interested in public outreach and scientific literacy, writing about topics in science and pseudoscience for her blog ( violentmetaphors.com ), the Huffington Post, and for the  Social Evolution Forum .

• Learning Consultations
• Peer Tutoring
• Getting Started
• Peer Education Courses
• Become a Peer Educator
• ADHD/LD Support
• Workshops & Outreach
• Learning Strategies
• Manage Time
• All Resources
• For Faculty & Staff

On reading research papers

We’ll be reading a lot of research papers in this course, so over the semester you will naturally develop your own way to read a research paper. Use these guides to get started.

First, some basic points; then, concrete reading guides.

A research paper encapsulates enormous effort

A good research paper distills significant work by its authors. My group has worked for years on tens of thousands of lines of code and huge numbers of experiments, most of which got thrown away, to produce a single 12-page paper. A paper’s authors are trying to boil down everything they learned into something you can digest. A single sentence may represent a full year of misdirected effort.

Of course, there are many kinds of effort, and a great research paper may represent a flash of insight rather than toil. That insight still required real work, namely everything the researcher did to prepare themselves to receive it.

A research paper encapsulates a moment in history

Any research paper is a picture of its time. The paper was written in a context shaped by technology and society. What hardware was available? What kinds of research were exciting to the community at the time? What kinds of research were being funded? An open reading can teach you a lot about what people were thinking in the months and years before publication.

A research paper deserves critical attention

As of 2019, more than 7 million scientific papers are published per year . They are not all equally good; some are outright fraudulent. We will try to avoid the really bad ones, but you will still find that all research papers have weaknesses, and for some papers the weaknesses may overwhelm the strengths. Some papers fail on their own terms when read carefully; some will fail to interest you because of your own cast of mind. Nevertheless, you can and should learn something from each paper.

You owe a research paper nothing

When you read a paper, your goal is extractive : What can this paper teach you , now ? A paper is not a precious artwork demanding a respectful, hushed approach. Skim it, skip around in it, disagree with it, rip it apart—whatever it takes to learn what you can—and when you’ve learned what you can, drop it. Despite the effort and history that formed the paper, you owe the paper nothing.

I read best when I read with curiosity, openness, and skepticism. The skepticism keeps me curious: What’s really going on in these experiments? The openness keeps me interested: even if I’m not interested in the topic, maybe there’s some trick I could learn from; and maybe the paper will show me why I should care about the topic after all.

Concrete reading guides

These guides have concrete advice on the reading process. Keshav’s is especially well known in the systems community.

• S. Keshav’s “How to Read a Paper”
• Michael Mitzenmacher’s “How to Read a Research Paper”
• Jennifer Raff’s “How to Read and Understand a Scientific Article”

These guides are great. They also contradict. (Keshav says to read the abstract first; Raff says to never read the abstract until the end.) There’s no one right way to read a paper. The literatures in different sciences have different qualities (for example, unfortunately for you, computer systems papers tend to be verbose), and our minds are different. We also read for different goals. Reading a paper in order to review it requires more antagonism than reading a long-published, well-cited work. And particularly at the beginning of this course, when we are reading multiple historical papers per course meeting rather than one current paper, I expect you to spend less than “three to four hours” per paper!

Public reading groups

You may be interested in these public examples of reading research papers.

• Adrian Colyer’s “The Morning Paper” blog (on hiatus, but great archives)
• Papers We Love

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-.

StatPearls [Internet].

How to read a scientific manuscript.

Martin R. Huecker ; Jacob Shreffler .

Affiliations

Last Update: September 12, 2022 .

• Definition/Introduction

The Statistics and Healthcare Economics section of StatPearls seeks to provide a framework for learners to engage with evidence-based medicine (EBM) in order to maintain high standards of clinical practice.

The father of EBM, Dr. David Sackett, describes EBM as “conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients … integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research." [1]  “Good doctors use both individual clinical expertise and the best available external evidence, and neither alone is enough .” [1] (Italics provided)

• Issues of Concern

Evidence-based medicine involves “life-long, self-directed learning in which caring for our own patients creates the need for clinically important information about diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, and other clinical and health care issues, and in which we [1] :

• Convert this information needs into answerable questions
• Track down, with maximum efficiency, the best evidence with which to answer them (whether from the clinical examination, the diagnostic laboratory from research evidence, or other sources)
• Critically appraise that evidence for its validity (closeness to the truth) and usefulness (clinical applicability)
• Integrate this appraisal with our clinical expertise and apply it in practice
• Evaluate our performance."

The above establishes the paradigm that clinicians must maintain curiosity and continuous learning to ensure effective care for all patients regardless of competence and experience. Please refer to the StatPearls overview chapter on evidence-based medicine for more background.

• Clinical Significance

This article will cover the approach to reading, digesting, and applying content from scientific manuscripts to optimize patient care for all providers.

Original research manuscripts have the following sections (in chronologic order) [2] :

• Title and Abstract
• Introduction (Background and Objectives)
• Methods (Design, Setting, Participants, Variables, Statistics)
• Results (Participants, Descriptives, Outcomes, Subgroups)
• Tables and Figures     
• Discussion (Key findings, Limitations, Interpretations)
• Conflict of Interest (COI), Author affiliations, Acknowledgments, Funding

Though less likely to follow a standardized outline, review articles typically consist of the following sections [3] :

• Context/Objective
• Methods (Data Sources, Study Selection, Data Extraction)
• Results (Tables and Figures)

Literature Search

The first step in answering a question about clinical management (and the first step in embarking upon one’s own research) is searching for the existing literature on a topic. The fundamental skill in evaluating the results of a literature search is understanding and interpreting a scientific paper. Other StatPearls chapters cover different types of studies (retrospective, prospective, cohort, case-control, blinded, epidemiologic, etc.). This chapter focuses on the practical aspects of reading a paper.

One main distinction involves whether a study describes a quality improvement project (measuring adherence to the current standard of care) or presenting new data (potential changes to the standard of care). One, two, or a handful of papers cannot establish a new standard of care; thus, one must always exercise caution in rushing to adopt practices gleaned from limited evidence that may prove false in subsequent research. [4]

The literature search is a crucial feature of practicing EBM. Tactics are described elsewhere, but one should explore different tools such as OVID, Pubmed, and Google Scholar. [5] Unlike a general Google web search, Pubmed Clinical Queries and Google Scholar perform very well, though different users will have different preferences. [6]  You can filter the search by year, subject type (human or animal), article type (trials, review), etc. Pay close attention to the journal in which papers appear. For instance, when using Google Web search, you may find non-peer-reviewed papers and non-indexed manuscripts, which likely will have less reliability. If you find and spend time reading ten low-quality papers from obscure predatory journals, you will not draw accurate conclusions about your clinical question. Again, garbage in, garbage out. Sadly, scientific literature becomes less and less readable over time, with authors lacking the skill or motivation to write concisely and straightforwardly. [7]

Efficient Manuscript Reading

• Effective literature search methods
• Introduction if needed
• Tables and Figures
• Results and Discussion
• Abstract again
• Methods and COI
• Write down notes, consider implications for practice, discuss with a colleague.

The first and most lasting impression readers have of a scientific publication is the Title. Because much of the audience only read the Title, it should convey the main take-home point. [8]  The other component of the paper that most readers will attend to is the Abstract. One should read the title and Abstract first to establish a blueprint for what the author(s) wants to convey related to their research.

The next step in reading a manuscript will depend upon one’s prior knowledge of the topic, goals of reading the paper, level of concentration/time to devote to reading, and overall interest. If one has a limited background knowledge on the topic, one should begin with the Introduction. The Introduction should establish what is already published/known on the topic, what gaps exist in the literature, and what this study intends to accomplish / hypotheses the researchers intend to test. Typically, the last paragraph of the introduction clearly states the aims of the study; thus, one can skip to this paragraph if desired.

The most efficient next step in reading the manuscript is reviewing the Tables and Figures. Tables should present data on the study subjects, their characteristics, and possibly how the subject sample or population was divided for the study. If done well, Figures will visually capture the larger themes of the paper, the most important findings presented in a visuospatial form (compared to word form in the conclusions).

After reviewing the Tables and Figures, move next to the Results section. Here, the author summarizes the objective results, ideally with no opinion as to the significance. You should begin to interpret the results and how they relate to the Tables and Figures. You can use your own background knowledge to compare the results to what has already been established in the literature. Even with limited background in statistics, attempt to critique the analysis, ensuring it makes sense. Consult and scrutinize the methods section with any questions on techniques, regardless of your background in statistics. Refer to other publications on tips to detect misleading or inaccurate statistical claims. [9]

Next, read the Discussion section. The first paragraph of the Discussion will usually highlight the most important findings of the study. The Discussion should interpret the results in light of stated hypotheses, citing within reason all prior (both remote and recent) studies directly relevant to these results. Look for gaps in citations – did the authors leave out any seminal papers? Do they make connections that seem reasonable, logical? Follow the given References; use this paper to explore prior similar papers. You will often find Reference(s) that is more precisely addressing the clinical question you seek to answer for your practice.

The Discussion (and Conclusion) sections can be fraught with bias, as the authors move from statement of objective data to interpretation. As the reader, our role is to beware of and detect biases or unsubstantiated conclusions that do not directly follow from the data presented. Do not simply accept conclusions without this critical evaluation. 

At this point, you may refer back to the Abstract to consider if the authors captured the most salient background, results, and conclusions. Did they take too much liberty with the conclusions? Did they downplay something of significance? To address questions about methodology, refer to the Methods section. Does the precise patient population allow for the generalization of the conclusions? Do the settings and participants look similar to your practice environment? Could you apply these findings to your patients? 

Finally, you should review the authors’ affiliations, contributions (if provided), and especially the conflicts of interest (COI). Authors with extensive COI may have difficulty objectively assessing their own data and making reasonable conclusions.

Once you have read the entire paper and feel comfortable with understanding, write down notes, think about how this research could impact your practice, and go explain the study to someone! This will test your comprehension and lead to better retention of the material, as with any new content in preparation for a licensing examination. [10]  Follow the other references you found in the paper and take notes from them. Put together a well-rounded answer to your original question. Exercise caution in adopting new practices to reduce iatrogenic harm from overzealous attempts at progressive practice. [11]  Maintain a balance between knowledge of new findings and the need for the reversal of disproven practices. [12]

• Nursing, Allied Health, and Interprofessional Team Interventions

The plural of anecdote is data, but don’t forget, garbage in, garbage out. Aggregating patient data can yield important insight superior to the recollection of individual patient encounters. However, poor methodology, bias, or a combination of both can lead to erroneous conclusions that eventually hurt patients. Continue to practice this skill of reading the literature, and review more papers related to this topic. [13]

If you have answered your clinical question and weighed the risk of harm and benefits, you can begin to integrate this new knowledge into clinical practice. If there is a gap in the literature related to your question, consider conducting your own research. Your ability to critically read a manuscript will equip you with the skills to write your own (covered in a separate StatPearls chapter).

• Review Questions
• Access free multiple choice questions on this topic.
• Comment on this article.

Disclosure: Martin Huecker declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Jacob Shreffler declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

This book is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ), which permits others to distribute the work, provided that the article is not altered or used commercially. You are not required to obtain permission to distribute this article, provided that you credit the author and journal.

• Cite this Page Huecker MR, Shreffler J. How To Read A Scientific Manuscript. [Updated 2022 Sep 12]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-.

In this Page

Bulk download.

• Bulk download StatPearls data from FTP

Recent Activity

• How To Read A Scientific Manuscript - StatPearls How To Read A Scientific Manuscript - StatPearls

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

How to Read a Research Paper – A Guide to Setting Research Goals, Finding Papers to Read, and More

If you work in a scientific field, you should try to build a deep and unbiased understanding of that field. This not only educates you in the best possible way but also helps you envision the opportunities in your space.

A research paper is often the culmination of a wide range of deep and authentic practices surrounding a topic. When writing a research paper, the author thinks critically about the problem, performs rigorous research, evaluates their processes and sources, organizes their thoughts, and then writes. These genuinely-executed practices make for a good research paper.

If you’re struggling to build a habit of reading papers (like I am) on a regular basis, I’ve tried to break down the whole process. I've talked to researchers in the field, read a bunch of papers and blogs from distinguished researchers, and jotted down some techniques that you can follow.

Let’s start off by understanding what a research paper is and what it is NOT!

What is a Research Paper?

A research paper is a dense and detailed manuscript that compiles a thorough understanding of a problem or topic. It offers a proposed solution and further research along with the conditions under which it was deduced and carried out, the efficacy of the solution and the research performed, and potential loopholes in the study.

A research paper is written not only to provide an exceptional learning opportunity but also to pave the way for further advancements in the field. These papers help other scholars germinate the thought seed that can either lead to a new world of ideas or an innovative method of solving a longstanding problem.

What Research Papers are NOT

There is a common notion that a research paper is a well-informed summary of a problem or topic written by means of other sources.

But you shouldn't mistake it for a book or an opinionated account of an individual’s interpretation of a particular topic.

Why Should You Read Research Papers?

What I find fascinating about reading a good research paper is that you can draw on a profound study of a topic and engage with the community on a new perspective to understand what can be achieved in and around that topic.

I work at the intersection of instructional design and data science. Learning is part of my day-to-day responsibilities. If the source of my education is flawed or inefficient, I’d fail at my job in the long term. This applies to many other jobs in Science with a special focus on research.

There are three important reasons to read a research paper:

• Knowledge —  Understanding the problem from the eyes of someone who has probably spent years solving it and has taken care of all the edge cases that you might not think of at the beginning.
• Exploration —  Whether you have a pinpointed agenda or not, there is a very high chance that you will stumble upon an edge case or a shortcoming that is worth following up. With persistent efforts over a considerable amount of time, you can learn to use that knowledge to make a living.
• Research and review —  One of the main reasons for writing a research paper is to further the development in the field. Researchers read papers to review them for conferences or to do a literature survey of a new field. For example, Yann LeCun’ s paper on integrating domain constraints into backpropagation set the foundation of modern computer vision back in 1989. After decades of research and development work, we have come so far that we're now perfecting problems like object detection and optimizing autonomous vehicles.

Not only that, with the help of the internet, you can extrapolate all of these reasons or benefits onto multiple business models. It can be an innovative state-of-the-art product, an efficient service model, a content creator, or a dream job where you are solving problems that matter to you.

Goals for Reading a Research Paper — What Should You Read About?

The first thing to do is to figure out your motivation for reading the paper. There are two main scenarios that might lead you to read a paper:

• Scenario 1 —  You have a well-defined agenda/goal and you are deeply invested in a particular field. For example, you’re an NLP practitioner and you want to learn how GPT-4 has given us a breakthrough in NLP. This is always a nice scenario to be in as it offers clarity.
• Scenario 2 —  You want to keep abreast of the developments in a host of areas, say how a new deep learning architecture has helped us solve a 50-year old biological problem of understanding protein structures. This is often the case for beginners or for people who consume their daily dose of news from research papers (yes, they exist!).

If you’re an inquisitive beginner with no starting point in mind, start with scenario 2. Shortlist a few topics you want to read about until you find an area that you find intriguing. This will eventually lead you to scenario 1.

ML Reproducibility Challenge

In addition to these generic goals, if you need an end goal for your habit-building exercise of reading research papers, you should check out the ML reproducibility challenge.

You’ll find top-class papers from world-class conferences that are worth diving deep into and reproducing the results.

They conduct this challenge twice a year and they have one coming up in Spring 2021. You should study the past three versions of the challenge, and I’ll write a detailed post on what to expect, how to prepare, and so on.

Now you must be wondering – how can you find the right paper to read?

How to Find the Right Paper to Read

In order to get some ideas around this, I reached out to my friend, Anurag Ghosh who is a researcher at Microsoft. Anurag has been working at the crossover of computer vision, machine learning, and systems engineering.

Here are a few of his tips for getting started:

• Always pick an area you're interested in.
• Read a few good books or detailed blog posts on that topic and start diving deep by reading the papers referenced in those resources.
• Look for seminal papers around that topic. These are papers that report a major breakthrough in the field and offer a new method perspective with a huge potential for subsequent research in that field. Check out papers from the morning paper or C VF - test of time award/Helmholtz prize (if you're interested in computer vision).
• Check out books like Computer Vision: Algorithms and Applications by Richard Szeliski and look for the papers referenced there.
• Have and build a sense of community. Find people who share similar interests, and join groups/subreddits/discord channels where such activities are promoted.

In addition to these invaluable tips, there are a number of web applications that I’ve shortlisted that help me narrow my search for the right papers to read:

• r/MachineLearning  — there are many researchers, practitioners, and engineers who share their work along with the papers they've found useful in achieving those results.

• Arxiv Sanity Preserver  — built by Andrej Karpathy to accelerate research. It is a repository of 142,846 papers from computer science, machine learning, systems, AI, Stats, CV, and so on. It also offers a bunch of filters, powerful search functionality, and a discussion forum to make for a super useful research platform.

• Google Research  — the research teams at Google are working on problems that have an impact on our everyday lives. They share their publications for individuals and teams to learn from, contribute to, and expedite research. They also have a Google AI blog that you can check out.

How to Read a Research Paper

After you have stocked your to-read list, then comes the process of reading these papers. Remember that NOT every paper is useful to read and we need a mechanism that can help us quickly screen papers that are worth reading.

To tackle this challenge, you can use this Three-Pass Approach by S. Keshav . This approach proposes that you read the paper in three passes instead of starting from the beginning and diving in deep until the end.

The three pass approach

• The first pass —  is a quick scan to capture a high-level view of the paper. Read the title, abstract, and introduction carefully followed by the headings of the sections and subsections and lastly the conclusion. It should take you no more than 5–10 mins to figure out if you want to move to the second pass.
• The second pass —  is a more focused read without checking for the technical proofs. You take down all the crucial notes, underline the key points in the margins. Carefully study the figures, diagrams, and illustrations. Review the graphs, mark relevant unread references for further reading. This helps you understand the background of the paper.
• The third pass —  reaching this pass denotes that you’ve found a paper that you want to deeply understand or review. The key to the third pass is to reproduce the results of the paper. Check it for all the assumptions and jot down all the variations in your re-implementation and the original results. Make a note of all the ideas for future analysis. It should take 5–6 hours for beginners and 1–2 hours for experienced readers.

Tools and Software to Keep Track of Your Pipeline of Papers

If you’re sincere about reading research papers, your list of papers will soon grow into an overwhelming stack that is hard to keep track of. Fortunately, we have software that can help us set up a mechanism to manage our research.

Here are a bunch of them that you can use:

• Mendeley [not free]  — you can add papers directly to your library from your browser, import documents, generate references and citations, collaborate with fellow researchers, and access your library from anywhere. This is mostly used by experienced researchers.

• Zotero [free & open source] —  Along the same lines as Mendeley but free of cost. You can make use of all the features but with limited storage space.

• Notion —  this is great if you are just starting out and want to use something lightweight with the option to organize your papers, jot down notes, and manage everything in one workspace. It might not stand anywhere in comparison with the above tools but I personally feel comfortable using Notion and I have created this board to keep track of my progress for now that you can duplicate:

⚠️ Symptoms of Reading a Research Paper

Reading a research paper can turn out to be frustrating, challenging, and time-consuming especially when you’re a beginner. You might face the following common symptoms:

• You might start feeling dumb for not understanding a thing a paper says.
• Finding yourself pushing too hard to understand the math behind those proofs.
• Beating your head against the wall to wrap it around the number of acronyms used in the paper. Just kidding, you’ll have to look up those acronyms every now and then.
• Being stuck on one paragraph for more than an hour.

Here’s a complete list of emotions that you might undergo as explained by Adam Ruben in this article .

Key Takeaways

We should be all set to dive right in. Here’s a quick summary of what we have covered here:

• A research paper is an in-depth study that offers an detailed explanation of a topic or problem along with the research process, proofs, explained results, and ideas for future work.
• Read research papers to develop a deep understanding of a topic/problem. Then you can either review papers as part of being a researcher, explore the domain and the kind of problems to build a solution or startup around it, or you can simply read them to keep abreast of the developments in your domain of interest.
• If you’re a beginner, start with exploration to soon find your path to goal-oriented research.
• In order to find good papers to read, you can use websites like arxiv-sanity, google research, and subreddits like r/MachineLearning.
• Reading approach — Use the 3-pass method to find a paper.
• Keep track of your research, notes, developments by using tools like Zotero/Notion.
• This can get overwhelming in no time. Make sure you start off easy and increment your load progressively.

Remember: Art is not a single method or step done over a weekend but a process of accomplishing remarkable results over time.

You can also watch the video on this topic on my YouTube channel :

Feel free to respond to this blog or comment on the video if you have some tips, questions, or thoughts!

If this tutorial was helpful, you should check out my data science and machine learning courses on Wiplane Academy . They are comprehensive yet compact and helps you build a solid foundation of work to showcase.

Web and Data Science Consultant | Instructional Design

If you read this far, thank the author to show them you care. Say Thanks

Learn to code for free. freeCodeCamp's open source curriculum has helped more than 40,000 people get jobs as developers. Get started

• Peterborough

Reading Scientific Papers

Understanding and analyzing empirical articles, understanding scientific papers, reading as a process, step 1: preview the scientific paper, introduction, step 3: reflect and take notes.

The first step to reading more critically and efficiently is to understand the structure of the source you’re reading. Thankfully, scientific papers, a.k.a. articles, typically follow a standard format that you may already be familiar with from writing lab reports—both are based on the scientific method and typically contain the following four sections: The introduction is where the authors present their research question and explain their hypotheses and predictions. The methods section details how they conducted the study and analyzed the data, and the results section summarizes the key findings. Finally, scientific papers end with a discussion where the authors interpret the results, explain whether they support the hypothesis, and relate the study to the broader field of research. This common structure helps scientists better communicate their research with one another and the larger public—armed with an understanding of this structure, you’ll now be able to better understand and analyze scientific research.

You likely think of reading as a one-step event: you pick up a book or article and read it. Experts on reading, however, suggest that a multi-step process can make you a more efficient and critical reader.

Step 1: Preview the source to get a sense of what it will offer

Step 2: Read for understanding and analysis

Step 3: Reflect and takes notes on the reading

Keep in mind that how you accomplish each of these steps will differ depending on what kind of source you are reading. The remainder of this guide details how to approach each step when reading scientific papers.

Before you begin to read a scientific paper, consider how it relates to the course, your experiment, or your research project. Next, preview the source itself to determine its main goal, method, and findings. Your first step should be to read the abstract, which provides a brief summary of the paper . As you read, ask

• WHAT did the authors want to find out?
• WHY did they want to know this?
• HOW did they answer the question?
• WHAT did they find out?
• SO WHAT? Why is this research important?

Keep in mind that reading the abstract alone will not provide you with an understanding of the source. You must read the article in full, section by section: the next portion of this guide will help you focus your reading to both understand what the author is trying to say and to analyze and evaluate the source.

Step 2: Read for Understanding and Analysis

Each section of a scientific paper is carefully organized to present information in an expected format—as you become familiar with this standard structure, you’ll be able to easily locate the specific information you seek. Use the following descriptions and guiding questions to navigate each section as you read. You may also want to use our  Template for Taking Notes on Scientific Papers to organize your notes after you read each section.

A careful reading of the introduction is essential to understanding the reasons for and goals of a scientific study. In this section, authors provide an overview of the general topic, summarizing  background information from the existing literature. The authors explain how their research adds to current knowledge and convey its importance. The introduction is also where you’ll find the research question(s) and expected answer(s)—in scientific papers, these answers come in the form of hypotheses and predictions (to learn more about these, check out our guide to  Understanding Hypotheses and Predictions . Introductions often conclude with a brief summary of how the authors tested their hypotheses—a preview of the methods section.

Questions to Check Your Understanding

• What is the research question?
• Why should it be studied (what gap does this research fill)?
• How has it been studied before?
• What are the hypotheses and predictions?

Questions to Guide Your Analysis & Evaluation

• Is the question clear?
• How does the work compare to other studies in the field?
• Will this research contribute to our knowledge in an important way?
• Is the hypothesis justified?

In the methods section, the authors provide a detailed account of how they completed their study or experiment, the materials and/or participants they used, how they measured particular variables, and how they analyzed their data. As a reader, you will want to pay careful attention to this section and determine the strengths and weaknesses of the study’s design.

• How did the authors conduct the study or experiment?
• What materials and measures did they use?
• How did they sample the study area, subjects, or population?
• How did they analyze the collected data?
• Are the measures appropriate and clearly related to the research question? Do they adequately test the hypothesis?
• Does the sampling (e.g., study areas, subjects, participants) fairly represent the larger population of the study?
• Is the analysis appropriate for the data?
• Are there noticeable flaws in the method?

The results section summarizes the data in text, figures, and tables. As a careful reader, you should examine this section and consider not only what the authors found but also what findings they chose to present and how (for example, which results warranted display in a figure? which didn’t?).

• What are the major findings?
• How are the findings presented/displayed?
• Are enough data displayed to demonstrate the results?
• How do the findings relate to the hypotheses?
• Are the statistics appropriately presented?
• Did you note patterns that the author does not mention?

In this section, the authors analyze their findings and explain whether their results support their hypotheses and predictions. The authors explain why (or why not) by comparing not only their results but also their approach to those of other related studies, providing essential context and grounding their work in the existing literature. They also discuss the limitations, importance, and implications of their results and detail possible applications, extensions, or revisions of their study.

• Did the data support the hypothesis?
• If not, does the author explain why?
• How do the results compare to those of other studies?
• Are the findings significant?
• What are the limitations and applications?
• Did the authors interpret the results appropriately?
• Are you persuaded by the findings?
• How significant are the limitations of the study?
• Do the authors offer plausible applications for their research?
• Does the discussion reflect the major points from the introduction?

Taking notes while you read is time consuming and can even distract you from focusing on the ideas you are reading. Instead, separate the acts of reading and notetaking by reading a section or a few pages and then stopping to take notes. Make sure that your notes provide answers to the questions posed in each of the sections above. Again, you may want to use our Template for Taking Notes on Scientific Papers to organize your notes as you go.

After you have read and taken notes on the paper, be sure to reflect on it. How does it compare to other papers you’ve read on this topic? How does it relate to your experiment or research project? How might you use it in your course work, lab report, or paper?

How To Skim Read Journal Articles

Fast-Track Your Literature Review By Focusing On Three Sections

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | May 2020

If you’ve just started your literature review process, you’re probably sitting on a pile of scientific journal articles and research papers that are (1) lengthy and (2) written in very dense , academic language that is difficult to digest (at the best of times). It’s intimidating, for sure – and you’re probably wondering how on earth you’re going to get through it all.

You might be asking yourself some of these questions:

• Do I need to read every journal article to make sure I cover everything?
• Do I need to read every section of each article to understand it?
• If not, which sections should I focus on?

First things first, relax (I can feel your tension!). In this post, I’m going answer these questions and explain how to approach your review of the literature the smart way , so that you focus only on the most relevant literature and don’t waste time on low-value activities.

So, grab a nice hot cup of coffee (or tea, or whatever – just no beers) and let’s take a look at those questions, one at a time.

Question 1:

Do i need to read every journal article on my topic when doing my literature review.

The good news is that you don’t need to read every single journal article on your topic. Doing so would just be a waste of your time, as you’re generally looking to understand the current state of the literature – not the full history of it.

But… and this is an important but. You do need to read quite a bit to make sure that you have a comprehensive view of the current state of the literature (and of knowledge) in your area of research.

Quality trumps quantity when it comes to reviewing the literature. In other words, you need to focus on reading the journal articles that are most cited (i.e. that other academics have referenced) in relation to your topic keyword(s). You should focus on articles that are recent, relevant and well cited .

But how do I know if an article is well cited?

Thankfully, you can check the number of citations for any article really easily using Google Scholar . Just enter the article title in Google Scholar and it will show you how many citations it has – here’s an example:

In fact, Google Scholar is a great way to find the key journal articles for any keyword (topic) in general, so chances are you’ll be using this to find your journal articles in the first place. Therefore, be sure to keep an eye on citation count while you’re sourcing articles. It would also be smart to dedicate a column to it in your literature review catalogue (you can download one for free here ) so that you can quickly filter and sort by citation count.

A quick caveat – citation count is not a perfect metric for the quality of a journal article (unfortunately there is no unicorn metric that indicates quality). While its usually a good indicator of how popular an article is, it doesn’t mean the findings of the article are perfect (remember, the Kardashians are popular too – enough said). To the contrary, it could indicate that there’s a lot of controversy regarding the findings (sounds like the Kardashians again).

So, long story short – don’t be conned by citation count alone. Be sure to also pay attention the to quality of the journal each article is published in (you can check journal rank here ), and pay attention to what other articles say about any given popular article.

Need a helping hand?

Question 2:

Do i need to read the full journal journal article when doing my literature review.

Some more good news – no, you don’t need to read every single word in each journal article you review as part of your literature review. When you’re just starting your literature review, you need to get a big picture view of what each journal article is saying (in other words, the key questions and findings). Generally you can get a good feel for this by reading a few key sections in each article (we’ll get to these next).

That said (ah, there had to be a catch, right?), as you refine your literature review and establish more of a focus, you’ll need to dive deeper into the most important articles. Some articles will be central to your research – but you probably still don’t need to read them from first page to the last.

Question 3:

Which sections of each journal article should i read.

To get a big-picture view of what any article is all about, there are three sections that are very useful. These three sections generally explain both what the article is about (i.e. what questions they were trying to answer) and what the findings were (i.e. what their answers were). This is exactly what you’re looking for, so these three sections provide a great way for you to save time during your literature review.

So, let’s take a look at the three sections:

1 – The abstract (or executive summary)

The abstract (which is located right up front) provides a high-level overview of what the article is about. This is giving you the first little taste of the soup , so to speak. Generally, it will discuss what the research objectives were was and why they were important. This will give you a clear indication of how relevant the article is to your specific research, so pay close attention.

Sometimes the abstract will also discuss the findings of the article (much like a thesis abstract ), but this is not always the case (yeah, the abstract can be such a tease sometimes). If it does, it’s a bonus. But even so, you should still read the other sections, as the abstract only provides a very high-level view, and can miss out on specific nuances of the research.

2 – The introduction section

The introduction section will go into more detail about the topic being investigated and why this is important for the field of research. This will help you understand a bit more detail about what exactly they were investigating and in what context . Context is really important, so pay close attention to that.

For example, they might be investigating your exact topic, but in a country other than your own, or a different industry. In that case, you’d know that you need to pay very close attention to exactly how they undertook their research.

So, make sure you pay close attention to the introduction chapter to fully understand the focus of the research and the context in which it took place . Both will be important when it comes to writing your literature review, as you’ll need to use this information to build your arguments.

3 – The conclusion

While the introduction section tells you what the high-level questions the researchers asked, the conclusion section tells you what answers they found . This provides you with something of a shortcut to grasping the gist of the article, without reading all the dull and dry detail – yeah, it’s a little cheeky, I know. Of course, the conclusion is not going to highlight every nuance of the analysis findings, so if the article is highly relevant to your research, you should make sure to also pay close attention to the analysis findings section.

In addition to the findings of the research, the conclusion section will generally also highlight areas that require further research . In other words, they’ll outline areas that genuinely require further academic investigation (aka research gaps ). This is a gold mine for refining your topic into something highly original and well-rooted in the existing literature – just make sure that the article is recent, or someone else may have already exploited the research gap. If you’re still looking to identify a research topic, be sure to check out our video covering that here .

By reviewing these three sections of each article, you’ll save yourself a lot of time, while still getting a good understanding of what each article is saying. Keep in mind that as your literature review progresses, you focus will narrow and you’ll develop a set of core highly relevant articles, which you should sink your teeth into more deeply.

Let’s Recap

In this post, we looked at how to read academic journal articles quickly and efficiently, to save you many hours of pain while undertaking your literature review.

The key takeaways to remember are:

• You don’t need to read every single journal article covering your topic – focus on the most popular, authoritative and recent ones
• You don’t need to read every word of every article. To start, you just need to get a high-level understanding of the literature, which you can get by focusing on three key areas in each journal article.
• The three sections of each journal article to review are the abstract , the introduction and the conclusion .
• Once you’ve narrowed down your focus and have a core set of highly relevant, highly authoritative articles, you can dive deeper into them, paying closer attention to the methodology and analysis findings.

And there you have it – now go on and hammer through that pile of articles at warp speed. While you’re at it, why not also check out our other posts and videos covering research topic ideation , dissertation and thesis proposal , literature review , methodology , analysis and more.

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling Udemy Course, Literature Review Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

28 Comments

Thanks Derek for the tips

Reviewing the Literature can be overwhelming if you do not have the plan or the right structure to navigate the pool of information

You’re most welcome, Aletta. All the best with your literature review.

I personally have found these tips as a key to my long standing problem of reading articles. Thanks a million times

Simple and easy to read guidance… funny too

Great to hear that, Rishen 🙂

Much appreciated Derek. I already realized I could not read everything, but you confirming that has brought a lot of relief.

Great to hear that, Mazwakhe 🙂

Derek sir, I’m really happy for you.You made me to think very smart and effective way to do the review of literature.

Thank you so much.

Dear Derek, thank you for your easy and straight forward guidance,

Thanks for the interesting and informative article

You’re most welcome, Sanoon. Glad it was useful.

Thanks for the insights, I am about to start my literature review and this article as well as the other material from GradCoach will help me on the jorney.

You’re most welcome! Good luck writing your literature review

It was a great and effective information.

Thank you that was very helpful. I am taking a directed studies summer course, and I have to submit a literature review by end of August. That article was short, straight to the point and interesting 🙂 thank you Derek

You’re welcome, Emy 🙂 Good luck with your studies!

Thanks Derek. Reading this article has given me a boost because I have been so stock on how to go about my literature review.Though I know I am not meant to read the whole article.But your explanation has given me a greater insight.

Thank you very much sir for your great explanation 😄 Hopefully I’ve enough diligence and courage to start

You’re most welcome, Felicia. Good luck with your research.

thanks, it was helpful.

Thanks Derek for doing such a wonderful job of helping. Blessings Bro!

Concise and applicable, nice! what a great help. I am now doing a literature review section on my thesis, I used to waste so much time on reading articles that is not relevant back and forth.

Thank for your great help!

Hi Derek, i am busy with my research literature. I submited my 1st draft but it was way irrelevant as per comments made by my supervisor… i gave myself time to find out where i diverted until i lesson to some of your videos. As we speak now, i am starting following the guidelines and i feel confident that i am on the right track now. Thanks a lot my brother

You’re most welcome 🙂

I can’t explain my mood when I realised I had to study more than 40 articles about my study field. It was indeed a game-changer. Thank you very much, Derek. Also, Kardashian was the best example that can be used for this situation :)))

Thank you for posting this. It truly takes a load off! I’m new to Doctoral research and peer review study and “Overwhelmed” doesn’t quite sum up how I felt. This is a tremendous help!

Thank you for the advice. Question, how do one keep count of all the articles considered from starting point to narrowed down. Manually, or is there another way?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

• What Is A Literature Review (In A Dissertation Or Thesis) - Grad Coach - […] first step of any literature review is to hunt down and read through the existing research that’s relevant to your research…

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

How to Read Research Papers: A Cheat Sheet for Graduate Students

• August 4, 2022
• PRODUCTIVITY

It is crucial to stay on top of the scientific literature in your field of interest. This will help you shape and guide your experimental plans and keep you informed about what your competitors are working on.

To get the most out of your literature reading time, you need to learn how to read scientific papers efficiently. The problem is that we simply don’t have enough time to read new scientific papers in our results-driven world. 

It takes a great deal of time for researchers to learn how to read research papers. Unfortunately, this skill is rarely taught.

I wasted a lot of time reading unnecessary papers in the past since I didn’t have an appropriate workflow to follow. In particular, I needed a way to determine if a paper would interest me before I read it from start to finish.

So, what’s the solution?

This is where I came across the Three-pass method for reading research papers. 

Here’s what I’ve learned from using the three pass methods and what tweaks I’ve made to my workflow to make it more personalized.

Build time into your schedule 

Before you read anything, you should set aside a set amount of time to read research papers. It will be very hard to read research papers if you do not have a schedule because you will only try to read them for a week or two, and then you will feel frustrated. An organized schedule reduces procrastination significantly.

 For example, I take 30-40 minutes each weekday morning to read a research paper I come across.

After you have determined a time “only” to read research papers, you have to have a proper workflow.

Develop a workflow

For example, I follow a customized version of the popular workflow, the “Three-pass method”. 

When you are beginning, you may follow the method exactly as described, but as you get more experienced, you can make some changes down the road.

Why you shouldn’t read the entire paper at once?

Oftentimes, the papers you think are so important and that you should read every single word are actually worth only 10 minutes of your time.

Unlike reading an article about science in a blog or newspaper, reading research papers is an entirely different experience. In addition to reading the sections in a different order, you must take notes, read them several times, and probably look up other papers for details. 

It may take you a long time to read one paper at first. But that’s okay because you are investing yourself in the process.

However, you’re wasting your time if you don’t have a proper workflow. 

Oftentimes, reading a whole paper might not be necessary to get the specific information you need.

The Three-pass concept

The key idea is to read the paper in up to three passes rather than starting at the beginning and plowing through it. With each pass, you accomplish specific goals and build upon the previous one.

The first pass gives you a general idea of the paper. A second pass will allow you to understand the content of the paper, but not its details. A third pass helps you understand the paper more deeply.

The first pass (Maximum: 10 minutes)

The paper is scanned quickly in the first pass to get an overview. Also, you can decide if any more passes are needed. It should take about five to ten minutes to complete this pass.

Carefully read the title, abstract, and introduction

You should be able to tell from the title what the paper is about. In addition, it is a good idea to look at the authors and their affiliations, which may be valuable for various reasons, such as future reference, employment, guidance, and determining the reliability of the research.

The abstract should provide a high-level overview of the paper. You may ask, What are the main goals of the author(s) and what are the high-level results? There are usually some clues in the abstract about the paper’s purpose. You can think of the abstract as a marketing piece.

As you read the introduction, make sure you only focus on the topic sentences, and you can loosely focus on the other content.

What is a topic sentence?

Topic sentences introduce a paragraph by introducing the one topic that will be the focus of that paragraph. 

The structure of a paragraph should match the organization of a paper. At the paragraph level, the topic sentence gives the paper’s main idea, just as the thesis statement does at the essay level. After that, the rest of the paragraph supports the topic.

In the beginning, I read the whole paragraph, and it took me more than 30 minutes to complete the first pass. By identifying topic sentences, I have revolutionized my reading game, as I am now only reading the summary of the paragraph, saving me a lot of time during the second and third passes.

Read the section and sub-section headings, but ignore everything else 

Regarding methods and discussions, do not attempt to read even topic sentences because you are trying to decide whether this article is useful to you.

Reading the headings and subheadings is the best practice. It allows you to get a feel for the paper without taking up a lot of time.

Read the conclusions

It is standard for good writers to present the foundations of their experiment at the beginning and summarize their findings at the end of their paper.

Therefore, you are well prepared to read and understand the conclusion after reading the abstract and introduction.

Many people overlook the importance of the first pass. In adopting the three-pass method into my workflow, I realized that many papers that I thought had high relevance did not require me to spend more time reading. 

Therefore, after the first pass, I can decide not to read it further, saving me a lot of time.

Glance over the references

You can mentally check off the ones you’ve already read.

As you read through the references, you will better understand what has been studied previously in the field of research.

First pass objectives

At the end of the first pass, you should be able to answer these questions: 

• What is the  category  of this paper? Is it an analytical paper? Is it only an “introductory” paper? (if this is the case, probably, you might not want to read further, but it depends on the information you are after)or is it an argumentative research paper?
• Does the  context  of the paper serve the purpose for what you are looking for? If not, this paper might not be worth passing on to the second stage of this method.
• Does the basic logic of the paper seem to be valid? How do you comment on the  correctness  of the paper?
• What is the main  output  of the paper, or is there output at all?
• Is the paper well written? How do you comment on the  clarity  of the paper?

After the first pass, you should have a good idea whether you want to continue reading the research paper.

Maybe the paper doesn’t interest you, you don’t understand the area enough, or the authors make an incorrect assumption. 

In the first pass, you should be able to identify papers that are not related to your area of research but may be useful someday. 

You can store your paper with relevant tags in your reference manager, as discussed in the previous blog post in the  Bulletproof Literature Management System  series.

This is the third post of the four-part blog series:  The Bulletproof Literature Management System . Follow the links below to read the other posts in the series:

• How to How to find Research Papers
• How to Manage Research Papers
• How to Read Research Papers (You are here)
• How to Organize Research Papers

The second pass (Maximum: 60 minutes)

You are now ready to make a second pass through the paper if you decide it is worth reading more.

You should now begin taking some high-level notes because there will be words and ideas that are unfamiliar to you. 

Most reference managers come with an in-built PDF reader. In this case, taking notes and highlighting notes in the built-in pdf reader is the best practice. This method will prevent you from losing your notes and allow you to revise them easily.

Don’t be discouraged by everything that does not make sense. You can just mark it and move on. It is recommended that you only spend about an hour working on the paper in the second pass. 

In the second pass:

• Start with the abstract, skim through the introduction, and give the methods section a thorough look. 
• Make sure you pay close attention to the figures, diagrams, and other illustrations on the paper. By just looking at the captions of the figures and tables in a well-written paper, you can grasp 90 percent of the information. 
• It is important to pay attention to the overall methodology . There is a lot of detail in the methods section. At this point, you do not need to examine every part. 
• Read the results and discussion sections to better understand the key findings.
• Make sure you mark the relevant references in the paper so you can find them later.

Objectives of the second pass

You should be able to understand the paper’s content. Sometimes, it may be okay if you cannot comprehend some details. However, you should now be able to see the main idea of the paper. Otherwise, it might be better to rest and go through the second pass without entering the third. 

This is a good time to summarize the paper. During your reading, make sure to make notes.

After the second pass, you can: 

• Return to the paper later(If you did not understand the basic idea of the paper)
• Move onto the thirst pass.

The third pass (Maximum: four hours)

You should go to the third stage (the third pass) for a complete understanding of the paper. It may take you a few hours this time to read the paper. However, you may want to avoid reading a single paper for longer than four hours, even at the third pass.

A great deal of attention to detail is required for this pass. Every statement should be challenged, and every assumption should be identified.

By the third pass, you will be able to summarize the paper so that not only do you understand the content, but you can also comment on limitations and potential future developments.

Color coding when reading research papers

Highlighting is one way I help myself learn the material when I read research papers. It is especially helpful to highlight an article when you return to it later. 

Therefore, I use different colors for different segments. To manage my references, I use Zotero. There is an inbuilt PDF reader in Zotero. I use the highlighting colors offered by this software. The most important thing is the concept or phrase I want to color code, not the color itself.

Here is my color coding system.

• Problem statement: Violet
• Questions to ask: Red (I highlight in red where I want additional questions to be asked or if I am unfamiliar with the concept)
• Conclusions: Green (in the discussion section, authors draw conclusions based on their data. I prefer to highlight these in the discussion section rather than in the conclusion section since I can easily locate the evidence there)
• Keywords: Blue
• General highlights and notes: Yellow

Minimize distractions

Even though I’m not a morning person, I forced myself to read papers in the morning just to get rid of distractions. In order to follow through with this process (at least when you are starting out), you must have minimum to no distractions because research papers contain a great deal of highly packed information.

It doesn’t mean you can’t have fun doing it, though. Make a cup of coffee and enjoy reading!

Images courtesy : Online working vector created by storyset – www.freepik.com

Aruna Kumarasiri

Founder at Proactive Grad, Materials Engineer, Researcher, and turned author. In 2019, he started his professional carrier as a materials engineer with the continuation of his research studies. His exposure to both academic and industrial worlds has provided many opportunities for him to give back to young professionals.

Did You Enjoy This?

Then consider getting the ProactiveGrad newsletter. It's a collection of useful ideas, fresh links, and high-spirited shenanigans delivered to your inbox every two weeks.

I accept the Privacy Policy

Hand-picked related articles

Why do graduate students struggle to establish a productive morning routine? And how to handle it?

• March 17, 2024

How to stick to a schedule as a graduate student?

• October 10, 2023

The best note-taking apps for graduate students: How to choose the right note-taking app

• September 20, 2022

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name  *

Email  *

Add Comment  *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

Post Comment

University of Illinois Chicago

University library, search uic library collections.

Find items in UIC Library collections, including books, articles, databases and more.

Advanced Search

Search UIC Library Website

Find items on the UIC Library website, including research guides, help articles, events and website pages.

• Search Collections
• Search Website
• UIC Library
• Subject and Course Guides
• Engineering
• How to read a scientific paper

Engineering: How to read a scientific paper

• Articles, Standards, and Databases
• Books & Reference Resources
• Engineering Data Repositories
• Funding Sources
• Managing Your Data
• Citation Managers
• Job Search Resources
• Writing Help
• Open Engineering Resources

Structure of a Technical Paper

How to Read a Scientific Paper

• How to Read a Paper A short work on how to read academic papers, organized as an academic paper. Some of the advice on doing a literature survey works better in the author's field (CS) but most the material works for everyone.
• How to Read a Research Paper Part of an assignment on how to read academic papers for a CS class, it describes some strategies and lays out some expectations in terms of time and effort that should be useful.
• How to Read Scientific Papers Without Reading Every Word A blog post that gives a similar but differently worded take on the same issue.
• How to read Mathematics An article discussing how to go about reading a math article or chapter.

  Health Promotion Practice. (2020). How to Read a Scholarly Article [Infographic].

 http://healthpromotionpracticenotes.com/2020/07/new-  tool-how-to-read-a-scholarly-article-infographic/  

Assistant Professor and Reference & Liaison Librarian (STEM)

• << Previous: Citation Managers
• Next: Job Search Resources >>
• Last Updated: Feb 17, 2024 2:25 PM
• URL: https://researchguides.uic.edu/engineering

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• Reading Research Effectively
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Applying Critical Thinking
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

Reading a Scholarly Article or Research Paper

Identifying a research problem to investigate usually requires a preliminary search for and critical review of the literature in order to gain an understanding about how scholars have examined a topic. Scholars rarely structure research studies in a way that can be followed like a story; they are complex and detail-intensive and often written in a descriptive and conclusive narrative form. However, in the social and behavioral sciences, journal articles and stand-alone research reports are generally organized in a consistent format that makes it easier to compare and contrast studies and to interpret their contents.

General Reading Strategies

W hen you first read an article or research paper, focus on asking specific questions about each section. This strategy can help with overall comprehension and with understanding how the content relates [or does not relate] to the problem you want to investigate. As you review more and more studies, the process of understanding and critically evaluating the research will become easier because the content of what you review will begin to coalescence around common themes and patterns of analysis. Below are recommendations on how to read each section of a research paper effectively. Note that the sections to read are out of order from how you will find them organized in a journal article or research paper.

1.  Abstract

The abstract summarizes the background, methods, results, discussion, and conclusions of a scholarly article or research paper. Use the abstract to filter out sources that may have appeared useful when you began searching for information but, in reality, are not relevant. Questions to consider when reading the abstract are:

• Is this study related to my question or area of research?
• What is this study about and why is it being done ?
• What is the working hypothesis or underlying thesis?
• What is the primary finding of the study?
• Are there words or terminology that I can use to either narrow or broaden the parameters of my search for more information?

2.  Introduction

If, after reading the abstract, you believe the paper may be useful, focus on examining the research problem and identifying the questions the author is trying to address. This information is usually located within the first few paragraphs of the introduction or in the concluding paragraph. Look for information about how and in what way this relates to what you are investigating. In addition to the research problem, the introduction should provide the main argument and theoretical framework of the study and, in the last paragraphs of the introduction, describe what the author(s) intend to accomplish. Questions to consider when reading the introduction include:

• What is this study trying to prove or disprove?
• What is the author(s) trying to test or demonstrate?
• What do we already know about this topic and what gaps does this study try to fill or contribute a new understanding to the research problem?
• Why should I care about what is being investigated?
• Will this study tell me anything new related to the research problem I am investigating?

3.  Literature Review

The literature review describes and critically evaluates what is already known about a topic. Read the literature review to obtain a big picture perspective about how the topic has been studied and to begin the process of seeing where your potential study fits within the domain of prior research. Questions to consider when reading the literature review include:

• W hat other research has been conducted about this topic and what are the main themes that have emerged?
• What does prior research reveal about what is already known about the topic and what remains to be discovered?
• What have been the most important past findings about the research problem?
• How has prior research led the author(s) to conduct this particular study?
• Is there any prior research that is unique or groundbreaking?
• Are there any studies I could use as a model for designing and organizing my own study?

4.  Discussion/Conclusion

The discussion and conclusion are usually the last two sections of text in a scholarly article or research report. They reveal how the author(s) interpreted the findings of their research and presented recommendations or courses of action based on those findings. Often in the conclusion, the author(s) highlight recommendations for further research that can be used to develop your own study. Questions to consider when reading the discussion and conclusion sections include:

• What is the overall meaning of the study and why is this important? [i.e., how have the author(s) addressed the " So What? " question].
• What do you find to be the most important ways that the findings have been interpreted?
• What are the weaknesses in their argument?
• Do you believe conclusions about the significance of the study and its findings are valid?
• What limitations of the study do the author(s) describe and how might this help formulate my own research?
• Does the conclusion contain any recommendations for future research?

5.  Methods/Methodology

The methods section describes the materials, techniques, and procedures for gathering information used to examine the research problem. If what you have read so far closely supports your understanding of the topic, then move on to examining how the author(s) gathered information during the research process. Questions to consider when reading the methods section include:

• Did the study use qualitative [based on interviews, observations, content analysis], quantitative [based on statistical analysis], or a mixed-methods approach to examining the research problem?
• What was the type of information or data used?
• Could this method of analysis be repeated and can I adopt the same approach?
• Is enough information available to repeat the study or should new data be found to expand or improve understanding of the research problem?

6.  Results

After reading the above sections, you should have a clear understanding of the general findings of the study. Therefore, read the results section to identify how key findings were discussed in relation to the research problem. If any non-textual elements [e.g., graphs, charts, tables, etc.] are confusing, focus on the explanations about them in the text. Questions to consider when reading the results section include:

• W hat did the author(s) find and how did they find it?
• Does the author(s) highlight any findings as most significant?
• Are the results presented in a factual and unbiased way?
• Does the analysis of results in the discussion section agree with how the results are presented?
• Is all the data present and did the author(s) adequately address gaps?
• What conclusions do you formulate from this data and does it match with the author's conclusions?

7.  References

The references list the sources used by the author(s) to document what prior research and information was used when conducting the study. After reviewing the article or research paper, use the references to identify additional sources of information on the topic and to examine critically how these sources supported the overall research agenda. Questions to consider when reading the references include:

• Do the sources cited by the author(s) reflect a diversity of disciplinary viewpoints, i.e., are the sources all from a particular field of study or do the sources reflect multiple areas of study?
• Are there any unique or interesting sources that could be incorporated into my study?
• What other authors are respected in this field, i.e., who has multiple works cited or is cited most often by others?
• What other research should I review to clarify any remaining issues or that I need more information about?

NOTE :  A final strategy in reviewing research is to copy and paste the title of the source [journal article, book, research report] into Google Scholar . If it appears, look for a "cited by" followed by a hyperlinked number [e.g., Cited by 45]. This number indicates how many times the study has been subsequently cited in other, more recently published works. This strategy, known as citation tracking, can be an effective means of expanding your review of pertinent literature based on a study you have found useful and how scholars have cited it. The same strategies described above can be applied to reading articles you find in the list of cited by references.

Reading Tip

Specific Reading Strategies

Effectively reading scholarly research is an acquired skill that involves attention to detail and an ability to comprehend complex ideas, data, and theoretical concepts in a way that applies logically to the research problem you are investigating. Here are some specific reading strategies to consider.

As You are Reading

• Focus on information that is most relevant to the research problem; skim over the other parts.
• As noted above, read content out of order! This isn't a novel; you want to start with the spoiler to quickly assess the relevance of the study.
• Think critically about what you read and seek to build your own arguments; not everything may be entirely valid, examined effectively, or thoroughly investigated.
• Look up the definitions of unfamiliar words, concepts, or terminology. A good scholarly source is Credo Reference .

Taking notes as you read will save time when you go back to examine your sources. Here are some suggestions:

• Mark or highlight important text as you read [e.g., you can use the highlight text  feature in a PDF document]
• Take notes in the margins [e.g., Adobe Reader offers pop-up sticky notes].
• Highlight important quotations; consider using different colors to differentiate between quotes and other types of important text.
• Summarize key points about the study at the end of the paper. To save time, these can be in the form of a concise bulleted list of statements [e.g., intro has provides historical background; lit review has important sources; good conclusions].

Write down thoughts that come to mind that may help clarify your understanding of the research problem. Here are some examples of questions to ask yourself:

• Do I understand all of the terminology and key concepts?
• Do I understand the parts of this study most relevant to my topic?
• What specific problem does the research address and why is it important?
• Are there any issues or perspectives the author(s) did not consider?
• Do I have any reason to question the validity or reliability of this research?
• How do the findings relate to my research interests and to other works which I have read?

Adapted from text originally created by Holly Burt, Behavioral Sciences Librarian, USC Libraries, April 2018.

Another Reading Tip

When is it Important to Read the Entire Article or Research Paper

Laubepin argues, "Very few articles in a field are so important that every word needs to be read carefully." However, this implies that some studies are worth reading carefully. As painful and time-consuming as it may seem, there are valid reasons for reading a study in its entirety from beginning to end. Here are some examples:

• Studies Published Very Recently .  The author(s) of a recent, well written study will provide a survey of the most important or impactful prior research in the literature review section. This can establish an understanding of how scholars in the past addressed the research problem. In addition, the most recently published sources will highlight what is currently known and what gaps in understanding currently exist about a topic, usually in the form of the need for further research in the conclusion .
• Surveys of the Research Problem .  Some papers provide a comprehensive analytical overview of the research problem. Reading this type of study can help you understand underlying issues and discover why scholars have chosen to investigate the topic. This is particularly important if the study was published very recently because the author(s) should cite all or most of the key prior research on the topic. Note that, if it is a long-standing problem, there may be studies that specifically review the literature to identify gaps that remain. These studies often include the word review in their title [e.g., Hügel, Stephan, and Anna R. Davies. "Public Participation, Engagement, and Climate Change Adaptation: A Review of the Research Literature." Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 11 (July-August 2020): https://doi.org/10.1002/ wcc.645].
• Highly Cited .  If you keep coming across the same citation to a study while you are reviewing the literature, this implies it was foundational in establishing an understanding of the research problem or the study had a significant impact within the literature [positive or negative]. Carefully reading a highly cited source can help you understand how the topic emerged and motivated scholars to further investigate the problem. It also could be a study you need to cite as foundational in your own paper to demonstrate to the reader that you understand the roots of the problem.
• Historical Overview .  Knowing the historical background of a research problem may not be the focus of your analysis. Nevertheless, carefully reading a study that provides a thorough description and analysis of the history behind an event, issue, or phenomenon can add important context to understanding the topic and what aspect of the problem you may want to examine further.
• Innovative Methodological Design .  Some studies are significant and worth reading in their entirety because the author(s) designed a unique or innovative approach to researching the problem. This may justify reading the entire study because it can motivate you to think creatively about pursuing an alternative or non-traditional approach to examining your topic of interest. These types of studies are generally easy to identify because they are often cited in others works because of their unique approach to studying the research problem.
• Cross-disciplinary Approach .  R eviewing studies produced outside of your discipline is an essential component of investigating research problems in the social and behavioral sciences. Consider reading a study that was conducted by author(s) based in a different discipline [e.g., an anthropologist studying political cultures; a study of hiring practices in companies published in a sociology journal]. This approach can generate a new understanding or a unique perspective about the topic . If you are not sure how to search for studies published in a discipline outside of your major or of the course you are taking, contact a librarian for assistance.

Laubepin, Frederique. How to Read (and Understand) a Social Science Journal Article . Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ISPSR), 2013; Shon, Phillip Chong Ho. How to Read Journal Articles in the Social Sciences: A Very Practical Guide for Students . 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2015; Lockhart, Tara, and Mary Soliday. "The Critical Place of Reading in Writing Transfer (and Beyond): A Report of Student Experiences." Pedagogy 16 (2016): 23-37; Maguire, Moira, Ann Everitt Reynolds, and Brid Delahunt. "Reading to Be: The Role of Academic Reading in Emergent Academic and Professional Student Identities." Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice 17 (2020): 5-12.

• << Previous: 1. Choosing a Research Problem
• Next: Narrowing a Topic Idea >>
• Last Updated: Apr 9, 2024 1:19 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

• NPTEL courses
• IIT Workshops
• Partnering courses

Course list

How to Read Research Papers

₹ 200.00

Last day of registration: November 21st, 2022

Mode of workshop : in-person at iit madras campus.

Out of stock

Description

Profile of the instructor(s).

• Eligibility & Fees

Certification

• Reviews (1)

Mode of workshop:  IN – PERSON

Description:, topics covered.

1. Consuming content: Books vs videos

2. Reading technical papers

   Type of paper: Engineering vs science vs social science

   Type of paper: Theoretical vs Experimental

   Reading approaches: multiple pass approach, skim and skip approach,  precision reading approach, reference hunting approach.

3. The hierarchical structure of papers

4. Critiquing without reading the entire paper.

5. Reviewing papers.

 Learning outcomes:

Session dates:  26th November, 2022

Time:  3pm to 5pm 

Last date of Registration:  November 21st, 2022

Prof Harish Guruprasad is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Computer Science and Engineering at IIT Madras. He works on Machine Learning theory/algorithms and aspects of explainability and fairness in AI.

Eligibility & Fees

Intended audience:.

Any PhD student

Fees  for the workshop:

Rs 236 (200+GST)

After successful completion of the course, a Participation certificate will be awarded to each participant.

1 review for How to Read Research Papers

G. Haripriya – November 18, 2022

Good opportunity

Your review  *

Name  *

Email  *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research paper

How to Write a Research Paper | A Beginner's Guide

A research paper is a piece of academic writing that provides analysis, interpretation, and argument based on in-depth independent research.

Research papers are similar to academic essays , but they are usually longer and more detailed assignments, designed to assess not only your writing skills but also your skills in scholarly research. Writing a research paper requires you to demonstrate a strong knowledge of your topic, engage with a variety of sources, and make an original contribution to the debate.

This step-by-step guide takes you through the entire writing process, from understanding your assignment to proofreading your final draft.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Understand the assignment, choose a research paper topic, conduct preliminary research, develop a thesis statement, create a research paper outline, write a first draft of the research paper, write the introduction, write a compelling body of text, write the conclusion, the second draft, the revision process, research paper checklist, free lecture slides.

Completing a research paper successfully means accomplishing the specific tasks set out for you. Before you start, make sure you thoroughly understanding the assignment task sheet:

• Read it carefully, looking for anything confusing you might need to clarify with your professor.
• Identify the assignment goal, deadline, length specifications, formatting, and submission method.
• Make a bulleted list of the key points, then go back and cross completed items off as you’re writing.

Carefully consider your timeframe and word limit: be realistic, and plan enough time to research, write, and edit.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

There are many ways to generate an idea for a research paper, from brainstorming with pen and paper to talking it through with a fellow student or professor.

You can try free writing, which involves taking a broad topic and writing continuously for two or three minutes to identify absolutely anything relevant that could be interesting.

You can also gain inspiration from other research. The discussion or recommendations sections of research papers often include ideas for other specific topics that require further examination.

Once you have a broad subject area, narrow it down to choose a topic that interests you, m eets the criteria of your assignment, and i s possible to research. Aim for ideas that are both original and specific:

• A paper following the chronology of World War II would not be original or specific enough.
• A paper on the experience of Danish citizens living close to the German border during World War II would be specific and could be original enough.

Note any discussions that seem important to the topic, and try to find an issue that you can focus your paper around. Use a variety of sources , including journals, books, and reliable websites, to ensure you do not miss anything glaring.

Do not only verify the ideas you have in mind, but look for sources that contradict your point of view.

• Is there anything people seem to overlook in the sources you research?
• Are there any heated debates you can address?
• Do you have a unique take on your topic?
• Have there been some recent developments that build on the extant research?

In this stage, you might find it helpful to formulate some research questions to help guide you. To write research questions, try to finish the following sentence: “I want to know how/what/why…”

A thesis statement is a statement of your central argument — it establishes the purpose and position of your paper. If you started with a research question, the thesis statement should answer it. It should also show what evidence and reasoning you’ll use to support that answer.

The thesis statement should be concise, contentious, and coherent. That means it should briefly summarize your argument in a sentence or two, make a claim that requires further evidence or analysis, and make a coherent point that relates to every part of the paper.

You will probably revise and refine the thesis statement as you do more research, but it can serve as a guide throughout the writing process. Every paragraph should aim to support and develop this central claim.

A research paper outline is essentially a list of the key topics, arguments, and evidence you want to include, divided into sections with headings so that you know roughly what the paper will look like before you start writing.

A structure outline can help make the writing process much more efficient, so it’s worth dedicating some time to create one.

Your first draft won’t be perfect — you can polish later on. Your priorities at this stage are as follows:

• Maintaining forward momentum — write now, perfect later.
• Paying attention to clear organization and logical ordering of paragraphs and sentences, which will help when you come to the second draft.
• Expressing your ideas as clearly as possible, so you know what you were trying to say when you come back to the text.

You do not need to start by writing the introduction. Begin where it feels most natural for you — some prefer to finish the most difficult sections first, while others choose to start with the easiest part. If you created an outline, use it as a map while you work.

Do not delete large sections of text. If you begin to dislike something you have written or find it doesn’t quite fit, move it to a different document, but don’t lose it completely — you never know if it might come in useful later.

Paragraph structure

Paragraphs are the basic building blocks of research papers. Each one should focus on a single claim or idea that helps to establish the overall argument or purpose of the paper.

Example paragraph

George Orwell’s 1946 essay “Politics and the English Language” has had an enduring impact on thought about the relationship between politics and language. This impact is particularly obvious in light of the various critical review articles that have recently referenced the essay. For example, consider Mark Falcoff’s 2009 article in The National Review Online, “The Perversion of Language; or, Orwell Revisited,” in which he analyzes several common words (“activist,” “civil-rights leader,” “diversity,” and more). Falcoff’s close analysis of the ambiguity built into political language intentionally mirrors Orwell’s own point-by-point analysis of the political language of his day. Even 63 years after its publication, Orwell’s essay is emulated by contemporary thinkers.

Citing sources

It’s also important to keep track of citations at this stage to avoid accidental plagiarism . Each time you use a source, make sure to take note of where the information came from.

You can use our free citation generators to automatically create citations and save your reference list as you go.

APA Citation Generator MLA Citation Generator

The research paper introduction should address three questions: What, why, and how? After finishing the introduction, the reader should know what the paper is about, why it is worth reading, and how you’ll build your arguments.

What? Be specific about the topic of the paper, introduce the background, and define key terms or concepts.

Why? This is the most important, but also the most difficult, part of the introduction. Try to provide brief answers to the following questions: What new material or insight are you offering? What important issues does your essay help define or answer?

How? To let the reader know what to expect from the rest of the paper, the introduction should include a “map” of what will be discussed, briefly presenting the key elements of the paper in chronological order.

The major struggle faced by most writers is how to organize the information presented in the paper, which is one reason an outline is so useful. However, remember that the outline is only a guide and, when writing, you can be flexible with the order in which the information and arguments are presented.

One way to stay on track is to use your thesis statement and topic sentences . Check:

• topic sentences against the thesis statement;
• topic sentences against each other, for similarities and logical ordering;
• and each sentence against the topic sentence of that paragraph.

Be aware of paragraphs that seem to cover the same things. If two paragraphs discuss something similar, they must approach that topic in different ways. Aim to create smooth transitions between sentences, paragraphs, and sections.

The research paper conclusion is designed to help your reader out of the paper’s argument, giving them a sense of finality.

Trace the course of the paper, emphasizing how it all comes together to prove your thesis statement. Give the paper a sense of finality by making sure the reader understands how you’ve settled the issues raised in the introduction.

You might also discuss the more general consequences of the argument, outline what the paper offers to future students of the topic, and suggest any questions the paper’s argument raises but cannot or does not try to answer.

You should not :

• Offer new arguments or essential information
• Take up any more space than necessary
• Begin with stock phrases that signal you are ending the paper (e.g. “In conclusion”)

There are four main considerations when it comes to the second draft.

• Check how your vision of the paper lines up with the first draft and, more importantly, that your paper still answers the assignment.
• Identify any assumptions that might require (more substantial) justification, keeping your reader’s perspective foremost in mind. Remove these points if you cannot substantiate them further.
• Be open to rearranging your ideas. Check whether any sections feel out of place and whether your ideas could be better organized.
• If you find that old ideas do not fit as well as you anticipated, you should cut them out or condense them. You might also find that new and well-suited ideas occurred to you during the writing of the first draft — now is the time to make them part of the paper.

The goal during the revision and proofreading process is to ensure you have completed all the necessary tasks and that the paper is as well-articulated as possible. You can speed up the proofreading process by using the AI proofreader .

Global concerns

• Confirm that your paper completes every task specified in your assignment sheet.
• Check for logical organization and flow of paragraphs.
• Check paragraphs against the introduction and thesis statement.

Fine-grained details

Check the content of each paragraph, making sure that:

• each sentence helps support the topic sentence.
• no unnecessary or irrelevant information is present.
• all technical terms your audience might not know are identified.

Next, think about sentence structure , grammatical errors, and formatting . Check that you have correctly used transition words and phrases to show the connections between your ideas. Look for typos, cut unnecessary words, and check for consistency in aspects such as heading formatting and spellings .

Finally, you need to make sure your paper is correctly formatted according to the rules of the citation style you are using. For example, you might need to include an MLA heading  or create an APA title page .

Scribbr’s professional editors can help with the revision process with our award-winning proofreading services.

Discover our paper editing service

Checklist: Research paper

I have followed all instructions in the assignment sheet.

My introduction presents my topic in an engaging way and provides necessary background information.

My introduction presents a clear, focused research problem and/or thesis statement .

My paper is logically organized using paragraphs and (if relevant) section headings .

Each paragraph is clearly focused on one central idea, expressed in a clear topic sentence .

Each paragraph is relevant to my research problem or thesis statement.

I have used appropriate transitions  to clarify the connections between sections, paragraphs, and sentences.

My conclusion provides a concise answer to the research question or emphasizes how the thesis has been supported.

My conclusion shows how my research has contributed to knowledge or understanding of my topic.

My conclusion does not present any new points or information essential to my argument.

I have provided an in-text citation every time I refer to ideas or information from a source.

I have included a reference list at the end of my paper, consistently formatted according to a specific citation style .

I have thoroughly revised my paper and addressed any feedback from my professor or supervisor.

I have followed all formatting guidelines (page numbers, headers, spacing, etc.).

You've written a great paper. Make sure it's perfect with the help of a Scribbr editor!

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

Is this article helpful?

Other students also liked.

• Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide
• Writing a Research Paper Conclusion | Step-by-Step Guide
• Research Paper Format | APA, MLA, & Chicago Templates

More interesting articles

• Academic Paragraph Structure | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples
• Checklist: Writing a Great Research Paper
• How to Create a Structured Research Paper Outline | Example
• How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples
• How to Write Recommendations in Research | Examples & Tips
• How to Write Topic Sentences | 4 Steps, Examples & Purpose
• Research Paper Appendix | Example & Templates
• Research Paper Damage Control | Managing a Broken Argument
• What Is a Theoretical Framework? | Guide to Organizing

"I thought AI Proofreading was useless but.."

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

• Top Courses
• Online Degrees
• Find your New Career
• Join for Free

How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper (Project-Centered Course)

Taught in English

Some content may not be translated

Financial aid available

173,349 already enrolled

Gain insight into a topic and learn the fundamentals

Instructor: Mathis Plapp

Included with Coursera Plus

(2,529 reviews)

Details to know

Add to your LinkedIn profile

See how employees at top companies are mastering in-demand skills

Earn a career certificate

Add this credential to your LinkedIn profile, resume, or CV

Share it on social media and in your performance review

There are 4 modules in this course

What you will achieve:

In this project-based course, you will outline a complete scientific paper, choose an appropriate journal to which you'll submit the finished paper for publication, and prepare a checklist that will allow you to independently judge whether your paper is ready to submit. What you'll need to get started: This course is designed for students who have previous experience with academic research - you should be eager to adapt our writing and publishing advice to an existing personal project. If you just finished your graduate dissertation, just began your PhD, or are at a different stage of your academic journey or career and just want to publish your work, this course is for you. *About Project-Centered Courses: Project-Centered Courses are designed to help you complete a personally meaningful real-world project, with your instructor and a community of learners with similar goals providing guidance and suggestions along the way. By actively applying new concepts as you learn, you’ll master the course content more efficiently; you’ll also get a head start on using the skills you gain to make positive changes in your life and career. When you complete the course, you’ll have a finished project that you’ll be proud to use and share.

Understanding academia

In this section of the MOOC, you will learn what is necessary before writing a paper: the context in which the scientist is publishing. You will learn how to know your own community, through different exemples, and then we will present you how scientific journal and publication works. We will finish with a couple of ethical values that the academic world is sharing!

What's included

8 videos 4 readings 5 quizzes 2 discussion prompts

8 videos • Total 28 minutes

• Introduction by Mathis Plapp • 1 minute • Preview module
• Let me walk you through the course • 3 minutes
• French version of the class • 0 minutes
• Why is publishing important? • 3 minutes
• "KYC": Know Your Community • 4 minutes
• How journals work: the review process • 4 minutes
• Presentation of scientific journals • 4 minutes
• Ethical Guidelines • 5 minutes

4 readings • Total 40 minutes

• Teaching team • 10 minutes
• Breakthroughs! • 10 minutes
• Additional contents • 10 minutes
• Examples of guidelines • 10 minutes

5 quizzes • Total 150 minutes

• Why is publishing important? • 30 minutes
• Know your community • 30 minutes
• How journals work: the review process • 30 minutes
• Communication with the editorial board • 30 minutes
• Ethical Guidelines and intellectual property • 30 minutes

2 discussion prompts • Total 20 minutes

• Your thoughts • 10 minutes
• Compatibility between paper submission and editorial board • 10 minutes

Before writing: delimiting your scientific paper

A good paper do not loose focus throughout the entirety of its form. As such, we are going to give you a more detailed view on how to delimit your paper. We are going to lead you through your paper by taking a closer look at the paper definition which will ensure you don't loose focus. Then we will explain why the literature review is important and how to actually do it. And then we will guide you with advices as to how to find the so-what of your paper! This is important as research is all about so-what!

6 videos 1 reading 5 quizzes 4 discussion prompts

6 videos • Total 26 minutes

• Paper definition "KYP", Know Your Paper • 3 minutes • Preview module
• How to: the literature review 1/2: find a good literature review • 3 minutes
• How to: the literature review 2/2: construction of your own literature review • 6 minutes
• How to: the research design • 3 minutes
• How to: the gap • 4 minutes
• Presentation of Zotero: aggregate references • 4 minutes

1 reading • Total 10 minutes

• Books and tools • 10 minutes
• So, what? • 30 minutes
• Think about it • 30 minutes
• Literature Review • 30 minutes
• Main ideas • 30 minutes
• The Gap? • 30 minutes

4 discussion prompts • Total 40 minutes

• Compatibility between paper and journal • 10 minutes
• Understanding how the literature review is structured • 10 minutes
• Finding Useful References: Difficulties & Strategies for Success. • 10 minutes
• Comparing different research designs on the same subject • 10 minutes

Writing the paper: things you need to know

In this part of the MOOC, you will learn how to write your paper. In a first part, we will focus on the structure of the paper, and then you will be able to see how to use bibliographical tools such as zotero. Finally you will be required to write your own abstract and to do a peer review for the abstract of the others, as in real academic life!

5 videos 2 readings 2 quizzes 1 peer review 2 discussion prompts

5 videos • Total 27 minutes

• The structure of an academic paper • 7 minutes • Preview module
• On writing an academic paper, preliminary tips • 6 minutes
• How to: the bibliography • 3 minutes
• The abstract • 6 minutes
• Zotero: online features • 3 minutes

2 readings • Total 20 minutes

• Important readings before writing a paper • 10 minutes
• More detailed information on how to write your article • 10 minutes

2 quizzes • Total 60 minutes

• Please, try by yourself • 30 minutes
• The bibliography • 30 minutes

1 peer review • Total 60 minutes

• Peer reviewing of an abstract • 60 minutes
• Comparing different constructions of papers • 10 minutes
• Discussing abstracts • 10 minutes

After the writing: the check list

After writing the paper comes the time of reading your paper a few times in order to get everything perfect.In this section you will learn how to remove a lot of mistakes you might have been writing. In the end, you will have to build your own checklist corresponding to your own problems you want to avoid. After this, your article can be submitted and will hopefully be accepted!!

5 videos 3 readings 1 peer review 1 discussion prompt

5 videos • Total 36 minutes

• How to avoid being boring? • 5 minutes • Preview module
• The main mistakes to look for: format • 3 minutes
• 1. The researcher • 9 minutes
• 2. The editor • 13 minutes
• Constructing your checklist • 4 minutes

3 readings • Total 30 minutes

• Avoiding mistakes • 10 minutes
• Format and Writing Readings • 10 minutes
• Tips • 10 minutes
• Now it is your turn: the checking list • 60 minutes

1 discussion prompt • Total 10 minutes

• Several content worth taking a look at • 10 minutes

Instructor ratings

We asked all learners to give feedback on our instructors based on the quality of their teaching style.

École polytechnique combines research, teaching and innovation at the highest scientific and technological level worldwide to meet the challenges of the 21st century. At the forefront of French engineering schools for more than 200 years, its education promotes a culture of multidisciplinary scientific excellence, open in a strong humanist tradition.\n L’École polytechnique associe recherche, enseignement et innovation au meilleur niveau scientifique et technologique mondial pour répondre aux défis du XXIe siècle. En tête des écoles d’ingénieur françaises depuis plus de 200 ans, sa formation promeut une culture d’excellence scientifique pluridisciplinaire, ouverte dans une forte tradition humaniste.

Recommended if you're interested in Education

O.P. Jindal Global University

Introduction to Academic Writing

University of Cape Town

Research for Impact

Stanford University

Writing in the Sciences

University of London

Understanding Research Methods

Why people choose coursera for their career.

Learner reviews

Showing 3 of 2529

2,529 reviews

Reviewed on Mar 1, 2018

The course is well structured that guides a scholar to construct a research paper step by step in a steady and sure way. I would definitely recommend the course for new research scholars.

Reviewed on Mar 24, 2021

An excellent course that provide participants with the foundations of writing a scientific paper. I would like to thank the Ph.D students who delivered this course and the people who organized it.

Reviewed on May 19, 2023

INDEED AN EXCELLENT COURSE I HAVE EVER ATTENDED AND I LIKE IT VERY MUCH.

TOO THE POINT AND EXACT ON THE TARGET. CONCISE BUT COMPREHENSIVE. KEEP IT UP AND KEEP MAINTAIN THE POSITION.

Open new doors with Coursera Plus

Unlimited access to 7,000+ world-class courses, hands-on projects, and job-ready certificate programs - all included in your subscription

Advance your career with an online degree

Earn a degree from world-class universities - 100% online

Join over 3,400 global companies that choose Coursera for Business

Upskill your employees to excel in the digital economy

Frequently asked questions

When will i have access to the lectures and assignments.

Access to lectures and assignments depends on your type of enrollment. If you take a course in audit mode, you will be able to see most course materials for free. To access graded assignments and to earn a Certificate, you will need to purchase the Certificate experience, during or after your audit. If you don't see the audit option:

The course may not offer an audit option. You can try a Free Trial instead, or apply for Financial Aid.

The course may offer 'Full Course, No Certificate' instead. This option lets you see all course materials, submit required assessments, and get a final grade. This also means that you will not be able to purchase a Certificate experience.

What will I get if I purchase the Certificate?

When you purchase a Certificate you get access to all course materials, including graded assignments. Upon completing the course, your electronic Certificate will be added to your Accomplishments page - from there, you can print your Certificate or add it to your LinkedIn profile. If you only want to read and view the course content, you can audit the course for free.

What is the refund policy?

You will be eligible for a full refund until two weeks after your payment date, or (for courses that have just launched) until two weeks after the first session of the course begins, whichever is later. You cannot receive a refund once you’ve earned a Course Certificate, even if you complete the course within the two-week refund period. See our full refund policy Opens in a new tab .

Is financial aid available?

Yes. In select learning programs, you can apply for financial aid or a scholarship if you can’t afford the enrollment fee. If fin aid or scholarship is available for your learning program selection, you’ll find a link to apply on the description page.

More questions

How to Read Research Papers (Andrew Ng)

During FastAI part 2 we have to read many research papers. I’ve personally found this a bit of a chore, and I have lacked motivation. I googled around to see if there were ways to do this better. I found several blog posts and youtube videos. The best I found was a great lecture from Andrew Ng (Stanford, deeplearning.ai): Career Advice / Reading Research Papers [YouTube]

I made a summary of it, which I will share here:

How to Read Research Papers

• Worst strategy: reading from the first word until the last word!
• Especially in deep learning, there are a lot of papers where the entire paper is summarized in one or two figures.
• You can often get a good understanding about what the whole paper is about without reading much of the text.
• Part of the process of writing papers is convincing the reviewers that your paper is worthy of acceptance, so you find that the abstract, intro, and conclusion are where the authors summarize their work really carefully. These are therefore the most useful parts to read.
• Neural network architectures are often written up in a table.
• Maybe also skim Related work section, for context or see if there is something you have read before.
• Read the Paper, but skip the maths
• In cutting edge papers we don’t always know what is really important and what isn’t important.
• Some great, highly cited papers have some parts which are groundbreaking and other parts which later turn out to be unimportant, but at the time the paper was written the authors could not know.
• Maybe what was the key part of the algorithm wasn’t what the authors thought.

Questions to Keep in Mind

• What did the authors try to accomplish?
• What were the key elements of the approach?
• What can you use yourself?
• What other references do you want to follow?

Deeper Understanding

• If you want to make sure you understand the maths of a paper, read through it and make some notes then try to re-derive from scratch on a blank piece of paper.
• As you get good at doing this you will gain the ability to derive novel algorithms yourself.
• Learn from the masters, not from their students.
• Lightweight: download and run their open-source code (assuming they have it).
• Deeper: reimplement their code from scratch.

General Advice: Steady reading, not short bursts. Better off reading 2-3 papers a week for the next year, than cramming everything in over Christmas.

Where to Find Papers

To keep up with the state of the art:

• ML Subreddit: r/MachineLearning
• Top ML Conferences: NeurIPS , ICML , ICLR
• ArXiv Sanity
• Friends / Online Community (e.g. fastai forums).

Other Stuff

• This older thread from fastai has great info too: Reading deep learning papers
• I’ve been using Mendeley for organizing and reading papers on my computer and iPad (it syncs across devices).

This is awesome summary. Thank you.

Thanks for sharing, very helpful summary!

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

A professor worried no one would read an algae study. So she had it put to music

Dead fish washed ashore in a red tide in 2018 in Sanibel, Fla. Joe Raedle/Getty Images hide caption

Dead fish washed ashore in a red tide in 2018 in Sanibel, Fla.

An anthropology professor at the University of South Florida recently published a paper she knew barely anyone would read. At least, not outside her field.

The paper, co-authored with three other professors, had to do with the impact of algae blooms and depletion of coral reefs on the region's tourism industry. The work was glum, says Heather O'Leary . It involved tracking visitors' reactions to the environment on social media.

"Part of the data for months was just reading tweets: dead fish, dead fish, dead fish," she recalls. "We were really thinking every day about the Gulf of Mexico and the waters that surround us, especially in St. Pete as a peninsula, about those risks, and the risks to our coastal economy."

The Picture Show

Changing the climate of protest with aerial art.

But attending concerts at USF's School of Music inspired and gladdened her. So she reached out to its director of bands, Matthew McCutchen .

"I'm studying climate change and what's going down at the coral reefs," he remembers her saying. "And I've got all this data and I'd like to know if there's any way that we can turn it into music."

Indeed there was. Composition professor Paul Reller worked with students to map pitch, rhythm and duration to the data. It came alive, O'Leary says, in ways it simply does not on a spreadsheet.

Matthew McCutchen, Heather O'Leary and Hunter Pomeroy at the University of South Florida Symphonic Band & Wind Ensemble show at USF Concert Hall. Aiden Michael McKahan/University of South Florida hide caption

Matthew McCutchen, Heather O'Leary and Hunter Pomeroy at the University of South Florida Symphonic Band & Wind Ensemble show at USF Concert Hall.

"My students were really excited to start thinking about how the other students, the music students, heard patterns that we did not see in some of the repetitions," she says. With music, she added, "you can start to sense with different parts of your mind and your body that there are patterns happening and that they're important."

In this case, she says, the patterns revealed the economic impact of pollution on coastal Florida communities. The complex challenge is a symptom of other, bigger problems. "The world is going to see more and more of these purportedly 'wicked problems,' the ones that take multiple people with different types of training and background to solve," O'Leary says.

Joe's Big Idea

Climate scientist tries arts to stir hearts regarding earth's fate.

The University of South Florida is excited about this composition . Other departments are getting involved, including communications, education and library science. Now, a group of faculty and students are working to bring together music and the environment in related projects, such as an augmented reality experience based on this composition. The group, which calls itself CRESCENDO (Communicating Research Expansively through Sonification and Community-Engaged Neuroaesthetic Data-literacy Opportunities) wants to spread awareness about the algae blooms, data literacy and democratizing science.

Edited for radio and the web by Rose Friedman. Produced for the web by Beth Novey. Produced for the radio by Isabella Gomez Sarmiento.

• science and music
• University of South Florida
• algae bloom

Help | Advanced Search

Computer Science > Machine Learning

Title: mixture-of-depths: dynamically allocating compute in transformer-based language models.

Abstract: Transformer-based language models spread FLOPs uniformly across input sequences. In this work we demonstrate that transformers can instead learn to dynamically allocate FLOPs (or compute) to specific positions in a sequence, optimising the allocation along the sequence for different layers across the model depth. Our method enforces a total compute budget by capping the number of tokens ($k$) that can participate in the self-attention and MLP computations at a given layer. The tokens to be processed are determined by the network using a top-$k$ routing mechanism. Since $k$ is defined a priori, this simple procedure uses a static computation graph with known tensor sizes, unlike other conditional computation techniques. Nevertheless, since the identities of the $k$ tokens are fluid, this method can expend FLOPs non-uniformly across the time and model depth dimensions. Thus, compute expenditure is entirely predictable in sum total, but dynamic and context-sensitive at the token-level. Not only do models trained in this way learn to dynamically allocate compute, they do so efficiently. These models match baseline performance for equivalent FLOPS and wall-clock times to train, but require a fraction of the FLOPs per forward pass, and can be upwards of 50\% faster to step during post-training sampling.

Submission history

Access paper:.

• HTML (experimental)
• Other Formats

References & Citations

• Google Scholar
• Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

• Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .

Morning Rundown: Trump's abortion maneuvering comes back to haunt him, China's middle class struggles to hang on, stranded sailors rescued after 'HELP' sign spotted

Prestigious cancer research institute has retracted 7 studies amid controversy over errors

Seven studies from researchers at the prestigious Dana-Farber Cancer Institute have been retracted over the last two months after a scientist blogger alleged that images used in them had been manipulated or duplicated.

The retractions are the latest development in a monthslong controversy around research at the Boston-based institute, which is a teaching affiliate of Harvard Medical School. 

The issue came to light after Sholto David, a microbiologist and volunteer science sleuth based in Wales, published a scathing post on his blog in January, alleging errors and manipulations of images across dozens of papers produced primarily by Dana-Farber researchers . The institute acknowledged errors and subsequently announced that it had requested six studies to be retracted and asked for corrections in 31 more papers. Dana-Farber also said, however, that a review process for errors had been underway before David’s post. 

Now, at least one more study has been retracted than Dana-Farber initially indicated, and David said he has discovered an additional 30 studies from authors affiliated with the institute that he believes contain errors or image manipulations and therefore deserve scrutiny.

The episode has imperiled the reputation of a major cancer research institute and raised questions about one high-profile researcher there, Kenneth Anderson, who is a senior author on six of the seven retracted studies. 

Anderson is a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and the director of the Jerome Lipper Multiple Myeloma Center at Dana-Farber. He did not respond to multiple emails or voicemails requesting comment. 

The retractions and new allegations add to a larger, ongoing debate in science about how to protect scientific integrity and reduce the incentives that could lead to misconduct or unintentional mistakes in research. 

The Dana-Farber Cancer Institute has moved relatively swiftly to seek retractions and corrections. 

“Dana-Farber is deeply committed to a culture of accountability and integrity, and as an academic research and clinical care organization we also prioritize transparency,” Dr. Barrett Rollins, the institute’s integrity research officer, said in a statement. “However, we are bound by federal regulations that apply to all academic medical centers funded by the National Institutes of Health among other federal agencies. Therefore, we cannot share details of internal review processes and will not comment on personnel issues.”

The retracted studies were originally published in two journals: One in the Journal of Immunology and six in Cancer Research. Six of the seven focused on multiple myeloma, a form of cancer that develops in plasma cells. Retraction notices indicate that Anderson agreed to the retractions of the papers he authored.

Elisabeth Bik, a microbiologist and longtime image sleuth, reviewed several of the papers’ retraction statements and scientific images for NBC News and said the errors were serious. 

“The ones I’m looking at all have duplicated elements in the photos, where the photo itself has been manipulated,” she said, adding that these elements were “signs of misconduct.” 

Dr.  John Chute, who directs the division of hematology and cellular therapy at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and has contributed to studies about multiple myeloma, said the papers were produced by pioneers in the field, including Anderson. 

“These are people I admire and respect,” he said. “Those were all high-impact papers, meaning they’re highly read and highly cited. By definition, they have had a broad impact on the field.” 

Chute said he did not know the authors personally but had followed their work for a long time.

“Those investigators are some of the leading people in the field of myeloma research and they have paved the way in terms of understanding our biology of the disease,” he said. “The papers they publish lead to all kinds of additional work in that direction. People follow those leads and industry pays attention to that stuff and drug development follows.”

The retractions offer additional evidence for what some science sleuths have been saying for years: The more you look for errors or image manipulation, the more you might find, even at the top levels of science. 

Scientific images in papers are typically used to present evidence of an experiment’s results. Commonly, they show cells or mice; other types of images show key findings like western blots — a laboratory method that identifies proteins — or bands of separated DNA molecules in gels. 

Science sleuths sometimes examine these images for irregular patterns that could indicate errors, duplications or manipulations. Some artificial intelligence companies are training computers to spot these kinds of problems, as well. 

Duplicated images could be a sign of sloppy lab work or data practices. Manipulated images — in which a researcher has modified an image heavily with photo editing tools — could indicate that images have been exaggerated, enhanced or altered in an unethical way that could change how other scientists interpret a study’s findings or scientific meaning. 

Top scientists at big research institutions often run sprawling laboratories with lots of junior scientists. Critics of science research and publishing systems allege that a lack of opportunities for young scientists, limited oversight and pressure to publish splashy papers that can advance careers could incentivize misconduct. 

These critics, along with many science sleuths, allege that errors or sloppiness are too common , that research organizations and authors often ignore concerns when they’re identified, and that the path from complaint to correction is sluggish. 

“When you look at the amount of retractions and poor peer review in research today, the question is, what has happened to the quality standards we used to think existed in research?” said Nick Steneck, an emeritus professor at the University of Michigan and an expert on science integrity.

David told NBC News that he had shared some, but not all, of his concerns about additional image issues with Dana-Farber. He added that he had not identified any problems in four of the seven studies that have been retracted. 

“It’s good they’ve picked up stuff that wasn’t in the list,” he said. 

NBC News requested an updated tally of retractions and corrections, but Ellen Berlin, a spokeswoman for Dana-Farber, declined to provide a new list. She said that the numbers could shift and that the institute did not have control over the form, format or timing of corrections. 

“Any tally we give you today might be different tomorrow and will likely be different a week from now or a month from now,” Berlin said. “The point of sharing numbers with the public weeks ago was to make clear to the public that Dana-Farber had taken swift and decisive action with regard to the articles for which a Dana-Farber faculty member was primary author.” 

She added that Dana-Farber was encouraging journals to correct the scientific record as promptly as possible. 

Bik said it was unusual to see a highly regarded U.S. institution have multiple papers retracted. 

“I don’t think I’ve seen many of those,” she said. “In this case, there was a lot of public attention to it and it seems like they’re responding very quickly. It’s unusual, but how it should be.”

Evan Bush is a science reporter for NBC News. He can be reached at [email protected].

Using pulp and paper waste to scrub carbon from emissions

Researchers at McGill University have come up with an innovative approach to improve the energy efficiency of carbon conversion, using waste material from pulp and paper production.

The technique they've pioneered using the Canadian Light Source at the University of Saskatchewan not only reduces the energy required to convert carbon into useful products, but also reduces overall waste in the environment.

"We are one of the first groups to combine biomass recycling or utilization with CO 2 capture," said Ali Seifitokaldani, Assistant Professor in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Canada Research Chair (Tier II) in Electrocatalysis for Renewable Energy Production and Conversion. The research team, from McGill's Electrocatalysis Lab, published their findings in the journal RSC Sustainability .

Capturing carbon emissions is one of the most exciting emerging tools to fight climate change. The biggest challenge is figuring out what to do with the carbon once the emissions have been removed, especially since capturing CO 2 can be expensive. The next hurdle is that transforming CO 2 into useful products takes energy. Researchers want to make the conversion process as efficient and profitable as possible.

• Energy and Resources
• Energy Technology
• Energy and the Environment
• Environmental Science
• Renewable Energy
• Global Warming
• Hazardous waste
• Photosynthesis
• Climate change mitigation
• Radioactive waste
• Carbon cycle
• Carbon dioxide

Story Source:

Materials provided by McGill University . Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference :

• Roger Lin, Haoyan Yang, Hanyu Zheng, Mahdi Salehi, Amirhossein Farzi, Poojan Patel, Xiao Wang, Jiaxun Guo, Kefang Liu, Zhengyuan Gao, Xiaojia Li, Ali Seifitokaldani. Efficient integration of carbon dioxide reduction and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural oxidation at high current density . RSC Sustainability , 2024; 2 (2): 445 DOI: 10.1039/D3SU00379E

Cite This Page :

Explore More

• Pacific Cities Much Older Than Previously ...
• The Milky Way in Ancient Egyptian Mythology
• Physical Activity Best in the Evening
• How the Body Switches out of 'Fight' Mode
• New Drug Prevents Flu-Related Lung Damage
• 3D Mouth of an Ancient Jawless Fish
• Connecting Lab-Grown Brain Cells
• Device: Self-Healing Materials, Drug Delivery
• How We Perceive Bitter Taste
• Next-Generation Digital Displays

Trending Topics

Strange & offbeat.

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Gender medicine ‘built on shaky foundations’, Cass review finds

Analysis finds most research underpinning clinical guidelines, hormone treatments and puberty blockers to be low quality

Review of gender services has major implications for mental health services

The head of the world’s largest review into children’s care has said that gender medicine is “built on shaky foundations”.

Dr Hilary Cass, the paediatrician commissioned to conduct a review of the services provided by the NHS to children and young people questioning their gender identity, said that while doctors tended to be cautious in implementing new findings in emerging areas of medicine, “quite the reverse happened in the field of gender care for children”.

Cass commissioned the University of York to conduct a series of analyses as part of her review.

Two papers examined the quality and development of current guidelines and recommendations for managing gender dysphoria in children and young people. Most of the 23 clinical guidelines reviewed were not independent or evidence based, the researchers found.

A third paper on puberty blockers found that of 50 studies, only one was of high quality.

Similarly, of 53 studies included in a fourth paper on the use of hormone treatment, only one was of sufficiently high quality, with little or only inconsistent evidence on key outcomes.

Here are the main findings of the reviews:

Clinical guidelines

Increasing numbers of children and young people experiencing gender dysphoria are being referred to specialist gender services. There are various guidelines outlining approaches to the clinical care of these children and adolescents.

In the first two papers, the York researchers examined the quality and development of published guidelines or clinical guidance containing recommendations for managing gender dysphoria in children and young people up to the age of 18.

They studied a total of 23 guidelines published in different countries between 1998 and 2022. All but two were published after 2010.

Most of them lacked “an independent and evidence-based approach and information about how recommendations were developed”, the researchers said.

Few guidelines were informed by a systematic review of empirical evidence and they lack transparency about how their recommendations were developed. Only two reported consulting directly with children and young people during their development, the York academics found.

“Healthcare services and professionals should take into account the poor quality and interrelated nature of published guidance to support the management of children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence,” the researchers wrote.

Writing in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) , Cass said that while medicine was usually based on the pillars of integrating the best available research evidence with clinical expertise, and patient values and preferences, she “found that in gender medicine those pillars are built on shaky foundations”.

She said the World Professional Association of Transgender Healthcare (WPATH) had been “highly influential in directing international practice, although its guidelines were found by the University of York’s appraisal to lack developmental rigour and transparency”.

In the foreword to her report, Cass said while doctors tended to be cautious in implementing new findings “quite the reverse happened in the field of gender care for children”.

In one example, she said a single Dutch medical study, “suggesting puberty blockers may improve psychological wellbeing for a narrowly defined group of children with gender incongruence”, had formed the basis for their use to “spread at pace to other countries”. Subsequently, there was a “greater readiness to start masculinising/feminising hormones in mid-teens”.

She added: “Some practitioners abandoned normal clinical approaches to holistic assessment, which has meant that this group of young people have been exceptionalised compared to other young people with similarly complex presentations. They deserve very much better.”

Both papers repeatedly pointed to a key problem in this area of medicine: a dearth of good data.

She said: “Filling this knowledge gap would be of great help to the young people wanting to make informed choices about their treatment.”

Cass said the NHS should put in place a “full programme of research” looking at the characteristics, interventions and outcomes of every young person presenting to gender services, with consent routinely sought for enrolment in a research study that followed them into adulthood.

Gender medicine was “an area of remarkably weak evidence”, her review found, with study results also “exaggerated or misrepresented by people on all sides of the debate to support their viewpoint”.

Alongside a puberty blocker trial, which could be in place by December, there should be research into psychosocial interventions and the use of the masculinising and feminising hormones testosterone and oestrogen, the review found.

Hormone treatment

Many trans people who seek medical intervention in their transition opt to take hormones to masculinise or feminise their body, an approach that has been used in transgender adults for decades.

“It is a well-established practice that has transformed the lives of many transgender people,” the Cass review notes, adding that while these drugs are not without long-term problems and side-effects, for many they are dramatically outweighed by the benefits.

For birth-registered females, the approach means taking testosterone, which brings about changes including the growth of facial hair and a deepening of the voice, while for birth-registered males, it involves taking hormones including oestrogen to promote changes including the growth of breasts and an increase in body fat. Some of these changes may be irreversible.

However, in recent years a growing proportion of adolescents have begun taking these cross-sex, or gender-affirming, hormones, with the vast majority who are prescribed puberty blockers subsequently moving on to such medication.

This growing take-up among young people has led to questions over the impact of these hormones in areas ranging from mental health to sexual functioning and fertility.

Now researchers at the University of York have carried out a review of the evidence, comprising an analysis of 53 previously published studies, in an attempt to set out what is known – and what is not – about the risks, benefits and possible side-effects of such hormones on young people.

All but one study, which looked at side-effects, were rated of moderate or low quality, with the researchers finding limited evidence for the impact of such hormones on trans adolescents with respect to outcomes, including gender dysphoria and body satisfaction.

The researchers noted inconsistent findings around the impact of such hormones on growth, height, bone health and cardiometabolic effects, such as BMI and cholesterol markers. In addition, they found no study assessed fertility in birth-registered females, and only one looked at fertility in birth-registered males.

“These findings add to other systematic reviews in concluding there is insufficient and/or inconsistent evidence about the risks and benefits of hormone interventions in this population,” the authors write.

However, the review did find some evidence that masculinising or feminising hormones might help with psychological health in young trans people. An analysis of five studies in the area suggested hormone treatment may improve depression, anxiety and other aspects of mental health in adolescents after 12 months of treatment, with three of four studies reporting an improvement around suicidality and/or self-harm (one reported no change).

But unpicking the precise role of such hormones is difficult. “Most studies included adolescents who received puberty suppression, making it difficult to determine the effects of hormones alone,” the authors write, adding that robust research on psychological health with long-term follow-up was needed.

The Cass review has recommended NHS England should review the current policy on masculinising or feminising hormones, advising that while there should be the option to provide such drugs from age 16, extreme caution was recommended, and there should be a clear clinical rationale for not waiting until an individual reached 18.

Puberty blockers

Treatments to suppress puberty in adolescents became available through routine clinical practice in the UK a decade ago.

While the drugs have long been used to treat precocious puberty – when children start puberty at an extremely young age – they have only been used off-label in children with gender dysphoria or incongruence since the late 1990s. The rationale for giving puberty blockers, which originated in the Netherlands, was to buy thinking time for young people and improve their ability to smooth their transition in later life.

Data from gender clinics reported in the Cass review showed the vast majority of people who started puberty suppression went on to have masculinising or feminising hormones, suggesting that puberty blockers did not buy people time to think.

To understand the broader effects of puberty blockers, researchers at the University of York identified 50 papers that reported on the effects of the drugs in adolescents with gender dysphoria or incongruence. According to their systematic review, only one of these studies was high quality, with a further 25 papers regarded as moderate quality. The remaining 24 were deemed too weak to be included in the analysis.

Many of the reports looked at how well puberty was suppressed and the treatment’s side-effects, but fewer looked at whether the drugs had their intended benefits.

Of two studies that investigated gender dysphoria and body satisfaction, neither found a change after receiving puberty blockers. The York team found “very limited” evidence that puberty blockers improved mental health.

Overall, the researchers said “no conclusions” could be drawn about the impact on gender dysphoria, mental and psychosocial health or cognitive development, though there was some evidence bone health and height may be compromised during treatment.

Based on the York work, the Cass review finds that puberty blockers offer no obvious benefit in helping transgender males to help their transition in later life, particularly if the drugs do not lead to an increase in height in adult life. For transgender females, the benefits of stopping irreversible changes such as a deeper voice and facial hair have to be weighed up against the need for penile growth should the person opt for vaginoplasty, the creation of a vagina and vulva.

In March, NHS England announced that children with gender dysphoria would no longer receive puberty blockers as routine practice. Instead, their use will be confined to a trial that the Cass review says should form part of a broader research programme into the effects of masculinising and feminising hormones.

• Transgender
• Young people

More on this story

What Cass review says about surge in children seeking gender services

Adult transgender clinics in England face inquiry into patient care

‘Children are being used as a football’: Hilary Cass on her review of gender identity services

Thousands of children unsure of gender identity ‘let down by NHS’, report finds

What are the key findings of the NHS gender identity review?

Mother criticises ‘agenda from above’ after release of Cass report

Cass review set to confirm shift in NHS care for children with gender dysphoria

Most viewed.