How to write the discussion section of a scientific article

Abstract

The Discussion is the hardest section of a scientific article to write, as cognitive skills must be used to properly contextualize the findings of a study. In this article, we guide scientific writers, particularly unexperienced ones, on how to structure a Discussion section based on an article by Docherty and Smith (1999). According to these authors, a discussion should be prepared by organizing information in the following order: (a) statement of principal findings; (b) strengths and weaknesses of the study; (c) strengths and weaknesses in relation to other studies, discussing particularly any differences in results; (d) meaning of the study: possible mechanisms and implications; and (e) unanswered questions and future research. Each component of this sequence is discussed in detail with examples drawn from the literature.

Duplicate references in the 'Introduction' and 'Discussion' sections of scientific articles on physical education and sports

“…Our results largely align with previous studies Duplicate References Index (DRI): Duplicate References Index (a metric reflecting the ratio of duplicate references to the total number of references in References.Background -previously published research that orients the current study within a scholarly area.Discuss-references mentioned because the current study is going into a more detailed discussion. [8,9,11,15], which also emphasized the importance of a careful and thoughtful approach to citing in scientific articles. However, our analysis expands on these insights by providing specific data on the impact of duplicate references on the citability of articles in the field of physical education and sports.…”

“…According to Vieira et al [8], starting the discussion with a reminder of key information from the «Introduction» section helps to contextualize the research. In our case, the duplication of references serves not just as repetition, but as a reinforcement of the main ideas and support for the depth of argumentation.…”

“…In the study by Vieira et al [8], it is recommended to start the discussion by recalling important information included in the "Introduction" and/ or "Material and Methods" sections. This approach allows for contextualizing the research.…”

Writing a Scientific Article: Focused Discussion and Rational Conclusions

“…Researchers note that discussion is very important to readers, however, it is extremely challenging for authors (Drotar, 2009). Some authors argue this is the trickiest part of the scientific article (Vieira et al 2019), defining the content of which is more difficult than describing the content of other sections (Day & Gastel, 2006). Several researchers (Derntl, 2014) state that the purpose of the discussion of the article is to draw general conclusions and present implications arising from the results obtained, but conversely such a position is not correct.…”

Stacking Ensemble Machine Learning Algorithm with an Application to Heart Disease Prediction

“…Similar results were observed with categorical feature data. As further analysis [32,33], the findings of the F 1 _score and Dor with all features are visualized in Figure 9 The findings of accuracy and log_loss with 13 features and with categorical features on test data are summarized in Figures 10 (a…”