PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 9183822

As you like it.

F N Ghadially
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

I have developed something of a reputation for criticizing freely and frequently at our meetings and in my writings. You say you like this and find it useful and entertaining. As you like it, you are welcome to more of it. My comments and criticisms are presented under the following headings: (1) criticize at your peril; (2) how it all started (unjustly accused!); (3) abbreviations (a source of perennial aggravation, confusion, and waste of time); (4) mysterious bodies in mesotheliomas; (5) call a crystal a "crystal," not a "crystalloid"; (6) electron microscopy-a study of osmium artifacts; (7) length-to-diameter ratio of microvilli (mission impossible); (8) lamellar bodies (a popular but debased term); (9) amyloid filaments, not fibers; (10) filaments and microtubules do not branch; (11) there is no such thing as pseudomelanosis; (12) botched histochemistry (just about every gastrointestinal tract pigment was misdiagnosed by histochemistry); (13) intranuclear Russell bodies, not "Dutcher bodies"; and (14) nuclear pores and virus-like particles (a new development in an old farce).

Explore related subjects

Abbreviations as TopicAnimalsArtifactsCrystallizationHistocytochemistryHumansMicroscopy, ElectronPathologyTerminology as TopicJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

F N Ghadially. As you like it.. https://doi.org/10.3109/01913129709021917

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Writing good abstracts.

INTRODUCTION: Writing an abstract means to extract and summarize (AB - absolutely, STR - straightforward, ACT - actual data presentation and interpretation). Thousands of abstracts are submitted to stroke conferences each year. The following suggestions may improve the chances of your work being selected for presentation, and to communicate results in the most efficient and unambiguous way. TITLE AND STRUCTURE: Make the title dynamic and informative, rather than descriptive. Structure the abstract following the IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion) principle for your future original paper where background would become Introduction and conclusions would enter Discussion. Select the appropriate category for submission carefully. This determines which experts grade the abstract and the session where your competitors represent their work. If selected appropriately, your abstract is more likely to be graded by peers with similar interests and familiarity with your work or field. Methods should describe the study design and tools of data acquisition shortly, not data. RESULTS: Provide data that answer the research question. Describe most important data with numbers and statistics. Make your point with data, not speculations and opinions. Abbreviations should be avoided and only be used after they have been spelled out or defined. Common mistakes include failure to state the hypothesis, rationale for the study, sample size and conclusions. Highlight the novelty of your work by carefully chosen straightforward wording. CONCLUSIONS: Conclusions have to be based on the present study findings. Make sure your abstract is clear, concise and follows all rules. Show your draft to colleagues for critique, and if you are not a native English speaker show it to a person who can improve/correct your text. Remember that accepted abstracts of completed original research should be followed by published original papers - if this is not intended or fails, it may indicate an impaired ability to succeed in scientific writing and an academic career.

Abbreviations as Topic↗
PubMed2006

Another ERICA trial?

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Abbreviations as Topic↗