How to Write an Efficient Discussion?
Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina), ISSN: 1986-5961, Vol: 72, Issue: 4, Page: 306-307
2018
- 7Citations
- 205Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations7
- Citation Indexes7
- CrossRef7
- Captures205
- Readers205
- 205
Article Description
Writing of scientific articles requires high competence and scientific awareness, and the respect of scientific patterns of behavior. Every article should essentially be followed by the IMRAD structure, which is generally represented, with minor modifications, in the entire modern scientific publishing. Writing articles must follow the thread, have a meaningful beginning and end, and from each and every part of the context. Also, it is indicate the benefits of the paper, to its defect, defining ambiguous points that would have the process for further analysis in some subsequent studies by the same or another group of authors. It means, the chapter - Discussion represents the heart of every scientific article. The writing of the discussion itself must point to the specificity of the results of the work itself. Author wants to point out the importance of quality description of chapter Discussion, when scientists prepare their articles with presenting own results comparing it with results of other authors with similar topic.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85065116508&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.5455/medarh.2018.72.306-307; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30515003; https://ejmanager.com/fulltextpdf.php?mno=302643308; https://dx.doi.org/10.5455/medarh.2018.72.306-307; https://www.ejmanager.com/fulltextpdf.php?mno=302643308
ScopeMed
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know