Presenting a study’s outcomes: An analysis of the results section in research articles


After the introduction and methods sections have been developed in Research Articles (RAs), it becomes essential to provide an account of the results obtained during the study. This section could be regarded as a summary of the collected data supplemented by tables and/or figures properly arranged (Pintos & Crimi, 2010). In order to achieve an accurate results section, there appear to be specific features and patterns that need careful consideration: selection of representative information, appropriate use of tables and figures; last but not least, fulfillment of academic writing requirements. Hence, a thorough analysis of such section in an RA written by Beckett et al. (2008) in the field of medicine is likely to be enlightening.
As for content in results section, special attention should be given to the selection of the data to be included as well as to the form in which it is organised. In Pintos and Crimi’s (2010) words, “[r]esearchers do not present the raw data they collected” (p.18); rather, decisions are made regarding the relevance such information bears to the matter under study. Under a capitalized heading where the word results is read, Beckett et al. (2008) state their trial’s outcomes in a simple but detailed description; making use of the past tense in almost all the section. By illustration, the authors’ exact words might be useful: “[t]he two study groups were well balanced at baseline (Table 1)” (Beckett et al., 2008, p. 1892); furthermore, they assert “[t]here was a difference of 15.0/6.1 mm Hg in blood pressure,(...), between the two groups at 2 years (Fig. 2)” (Beckett et al., 2008, p. 1893).
As the quotes above suggest, researchers in charge of writing the article under analysis have made use of tables as well as figures to allow readers to understand what has been explained in the text. Broadly speaking, tables and figures seem to be useful sources to present great deals of information in reduced spaces. Furthermore, they could be regarded not only as effective tools at the moment of establishing relations between variables, but also as pertinent tools to present quantitative data.
From the foregoing discussion, it might be claimed that statistical information presented in the form of tables is likely to support the writers’ description of results. In Beckett et al.’s (2008) article it is possible to identify specific characteristics regarding tables’ format and content. To start with, each word in their titles has been capitalized except for prepositions. Additionally, titles, apart from being properly located on the left table margin, appear to explain its content accurately. Despite horizontal lines have not been used to separate information inside the tables, data has been differenciated by means of shading techniques. Moreover, columns and rows have been given their own headings which are written in bold type. Last but not least, specific notes have been added below the tables to explain the meaning of particular entries.
As far as figures are concerned, they can be defined as “any kind of illustration (...) [that] conveys an overall pattern of results at a quick glance” (Pintos and Crimi, 2010, p. 27). Beckett et al. (2008) have opted for using three different types: a flow-chart explaining the stages participants went through during the trial; a scatter plot graph to establish the correlation between participants’ blood pressure and years under treatment; lastly, a line graph depicting the relationship between two quantitative variables has been effectively implemented. Properly cited between brackets in the paper’s body, all figures appear to be accompanied by accurate legends, typed in a different as well as smaller font.
All in all, it could be stated that results sections play a crucial role within RAs since they aid researchers in their demanding task of reporting outcomes. As the analysis of Beckett et al.’s (2008) article suggests, being aware of specifications as well as basic rules regarding this sections’ layout and format becomes essential if results are to be effectively presented. This seems to be the reason why not only collected data appears to be relevant but also how it is selected, presented as well as described within the paper would deserve careful devotion.














References


Beckett, N. S., Peters, R., Fletcher, A. E., Staessen, J. A., Liu, L., Dumitrascu, D., et al. (2008). Treatment of hypertension in patients 80 years of age or older. The New England Journal of Medicine, 358 (18), 1887-1898. Retrieved 17th May, 2010, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=2730

Pintos, V., & Crimi, Y. (2010). Unit 3: The research article: results, discussions and conclusions. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Universidad CAECE. Retrieved 17th April, 2010, from
http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=2730