How to write

material and methods

- And a few hints about how not to
do it….
 For whom?
• Who will be the most likely reader?
• Journal preference
• Subject matter
• Consider your audience:
– Where is the reader?
(Do you talk about Norway, Bergen or Fantoft in the
heading)
– Interest of the audience?
(HIV/AIDS epidemiology or biomedicine, child health,
public health, policy, health system, statistics) etc.
 The journal
• You (and your co-authors) have decided on
the journal
• Pub-med indexed
• Open-access
• Respectable
• Not ‘impossible’
 Instruction for authors
What to do:
Check other papers in the journal
Check instruction for authors carefully!

• You get all you need on:

– Length (word count)
– Headings and subheadings
– “Material and methods” “Subjects and methods”
“Methodology” etc
 Standard elements
• Design
• Site
• Time
• Study population
• Selection
• Recruitment
• (Intervention) – if an Intervention follow CONSORT!
• Data
• Data collection procedures
• Data management
• Measurements and instruments
• Variables in analysis
• Analysis
• Ethics
 Site
• We must understand where (place and
context)
– Sub-study of something bigger? (refer)
– Independent study
– Urban/rural/way-of-living
– Anything special
 Study population
• Who are they?
• Men/women/children/age
• Be exact
– Aviod boring stuff which is a distraction, not in the information
pathway of the paper: …. “Was done in Åsane outside Bergen, a
sub-country of 71358 inhabitants, average life expectancy 81.23
years for women and 80.37 for men”

• Recruited how/from where/when

• Sampled how/numerical presentaion
 Qualitative vs Quantiative
• The reader is interested in what you have done
where – not everything you possibly know about
the place
• The reader is interested in how you did things –
write it well and exact – do not hide limitations
(reviewers always discover it) and will ask for it
• Quatliative methods: How do you relate to your
collected data
• Quantiative methods: Anything we need to know
that could increase bias?
 Use of checklists
• http://www.equator-network.org/reporting-
guidelines/qualitative-research-review-
guidelines-rats/

• http://www.equator-network.org/

– The equator network summarise useful lists for us

– Including STROBE (observational), PRISMA
(systematic reviews)
 http://www.consort-statement.org/
• http://www.consort-
statement.org/checklists/view/32-consort/66-
title
 Other checklists
• Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP)
- too simplistic
RATS (used by BMC)
 Task
• Read method sections:
– Based on a) presentation (broad bullets covered)
– Based b) selected appropriate checklist are key
points covered?
• Further points to consider:
– Length
– Language
– Obs: qual methods (writer’s positioning of
him/herself)
 Standard elements
• Design (yellow)
• Site (orange)
• Time (red)
• Study population (green) (who is target population)
• Selection (blue) [Inclusion in main study/substudy vs inclusion in analysis]
Who is recruited in study/analysis from the target population (study profile)
• Recruitment (how is the target population included/excluded) (blue)
• (Intervention) – if an Intervention follow consort!
• Data (what is the data going into the analysis) Variables in analysis– (purple)
• Data collection procedures (brown)
• Data management (pink)
• Measurements and instruments
• Analysis
• Ethics
 Consider
• Publication of protocol
• http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-
2334/12/246
• Attachment of appendix (need online
connection/not always available from the pdfs
• http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article
/pii/S0140673611607381
• file://eir.uib.no/Home1/mihie/Downloads/m
mc1.pdf