Article

Comment lire un article scientifique médical

Revue de médecine périnatale 01/2011; 3(2):64-65. DOI: 10.1007/s12611-011-0112-1

ABSTRACT La littérature médicale abonde de travaux dont la rigueur scientifique s’avère très inégale. Le but de ce travail est d’inventorier
les exigences auxquelles doivent satisfaire les articles médicaux à chacune de leurs étapes: introduction, population ou matériel
et méthodes, résultats et discussion. Leur connaissance est nécessaire autant pour la rédaction que la lecture des articles
médicaux.

Most papers published in the medical journals are of substandard quality. The aim of this review is to invent the methodological
criteria for assessing the design and, finally, the value of a study. The recognition of methodological flaws implies a critical
appraisal of introduction, methods, results and discussion. Knowledge of these criteria is necessary for writers and for readers
as well.

Mots clésLecture critique–Article scientifique–Méthodologie
KeywordsCritical reading–Scientific article–Methodology

1 Bookmark
 · 
287 Views
  • Source
    BMJ Clinical Research 08/1997; 315(7101):180-3. · 14.09 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Most physicians have had little or no exposure to systematic teaching or training during the medical school and residency with respect to writing and publishing an original research article. The framework of every article should include the study objective(s), study design, results, and conclusion(s). The current "Clinical Opinion" article proposes a set of guidelines, based on the authors' experience, which can be useful to junior physicians who plan to publish their work. These guidelines should assist not only in the writing process of the initial manuscript but also in responding to reviews and in modifying the original manuscript.
    American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 09/2009; 202(4):344.e1-6. · 3.28 Impact Factor