JOURNAL CLUB: Accuracy of comparing bone quality to chocolate bars for patient information purposes: observational study
Martin Fenner
Saturday, 17 May 2008 07:54 UTC
Inspired by a paper suggested by James Butcher, I would like to recommend another paper from the Christmas edition of the British Medical Journal:
Jones P, Jones S, Stone D. Accuracy of comparing bone quality to chocolate bars for patient information purposes: observational study. BMJ. 2007;335:1285-7.
The title is a tad too complicated and doesn’t state the main finding of the paper, the obervational study part could have ben ommitted. I like the structured abstract which is short and clear. The paper makes ample use of tables and figures that help to illustrate the research findings. Two additional features of BMJ papers are helpful: a box that summarizes What is already known on the topic and What this study adds and a clear statement of author contributions. What is missing is a statistical analysis of the findings, that probably slipped through the peer review process. And there was no ethical approval, this kind of study would not have been possible in Germany.
And as a bonus, the PDF version of the paper includes the summary of another important study: Dissent of the testis.
-
Replies
-
Martin, you made my week.
Although, in fairness, it would have taken some seriously disasterous writing to keep me from reading about chocolate. While the article was entertaining and the point being made was clear (and I appreciate it), I think the writing is meant, to a certain extent, to be ironic, and so I’m not entirely certain it belongs in a list of examples of good writing.
Oh, and I love the term ‘interchunkal’. LOL
-
Hawley, I believe that this and similar papers in the Christmas editions of the BMJ (and some other places) do promote good scientific writing. It is often forgotten that writing and reading papers can also be fun, and this also makes the paper easier to read.
But irony is a dangerous rhetorical device, because it can confuse the readers. Even though the spoof articles in the Christmas BMJ are famous (just look at the other papers in the same issue), these articles are frequently picked up as serious science by the press.
-
That’s incredible, Martin! That BBC article linked to by Language Log — I could not believe my eyes.
-
Sometimes, I wish I could write the equivalent to “the number of bars was limited by research funds”… as in, if you have more money and you doubt my conclusions, do it again yourself and I defy you to do it better! And keep your weight down at the same time!
-
