Grech Victor
University of Malta and Consultant Paediatric Cardiologist, Mater Dei Hospital, Msida Malta.
Early Hum Dev. 2019 Feb;129:79-80. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2019.02.001.
This WASP (Write a Scientific Paper) Best Practice Guidelines (BPG) will wrap up all of the aspects pertaining to qualitative analyses as well as some more theoretical aspects of paper writing. These include types of studies and their importance in the hierarchy of evidence base as practiced in medicine. In addition, two papers review very practical aspects of paper writing including which journals to target (and why), and realistic methods for dealing with editors. Another paper also deals with fraud and hoax in science. Since the next BPG collection pertaining to WASP will deal with qualitative methods of analysis, by way of introduction to different ways of doing things, this collection will also review the practical differences between writing and presentation in the humanities and in the sciences. A paper will also very briefly review interdisciplinarity, including the depiction of interdisciplinarians as envisaged in future, in the (albeit speculative) science fiction genre. A final paper will demonstrate several precepts that have been highlighted over these BPGs, utilising as a practical example, a novel study that uses past requirements in order to estimate anticipated trends in cardiology service requirements at Mater Dei Hospital, Malta.
这份《撰写科学论文》最佳实践指南（BPG）将涵盖与定性分析相关的所有方面以及论文写作的一些更具理论性的方面。这些包括研究类型及其在医学实践中证据基础等级体系中的重要性。此外，两篇论文回顾了论文写作非常实用的方面，包括目标期刊（以及原因），以及与编辑打交道的现实方法。另一篇论文还探讨了科学领域中的欺诈和恶作剧。由于下一批与《撰写科学论文》相关的BPG将涉及定性分析方法，作为对不同做事方式的介绍，本批指南还将回顾人文科学和自然科学在写作与展示方面的实际差异。一篇论文还将非常简要地回顾跨学科性，包括在（尽管具有推测性的）科幻体裁中对未来跨学科研究者的描绘。最后一篇论文将以马耳他圣母医院一项新颖的研究为例，展示在这些BPG中所强调的若干准则，该研究利用过去的要求来估计心脏病学服务需求的预期趋势。
