Stats Made Simple: How to read a scientific paper?

Reading a scientific paper is not always easy or appealing. Where to begin, which section to prioritise, how to approach the often-dense methods section? Depending on your career stage, this task may require more or less effort [1]. The large volume of publications also makes it impossible to read everything of interest [2]. It is therefore useful to cultivate two complementary skills: rapid reading to screen articles and careful reading for in-depth appraisal.

The IMRAD structure

Scientific papers generally follow the IMRAD format: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion [3]. Each section serves a distinct purpose:

• Introduction: frames the rationale and the problem.
• Methods: describes how the study was conducted; key for assessing validity.
• Results: presents the data without interpretation.
• Discussion: interprets findings, acknowledges limitations, and situates the work in context.

Understanding these functions is essential for effective reading. A useful rule is to trust the data more than the authors’ interpretations, and to verify that the conclusions logically follow from the results. For instance, no overinterpretation that goes beyond the results.

Where to start? 

When carefully reading a paper, most researchers begin with the Abstract. It offers a concise overview and helps determine relevance. A large survey across career stages showed that the abstract is consistently the entry point, but differences emerge in what follows [1]. Junior readers often gravitate towards the Introduction and Discussion, while experienced researchers emphasise the Methods and Results, which are central to critical appraisal. 

Reading with purpose

Your reading strategy should reflect your goal. If the aim is a quick overview, focusing on the Abstract, figures, and Discussion may be sufficient. For an analytical review, the Methods and Results are indispensable [4]. Key questions to ask include: Is the study design appropriate? Are the analyses robust? Are the findings relevant to my field? Validated checklists such as CASP, CONSORT, or PRISMA provide structured ways to guide this process and avoid overlooking important details.

Practice makes perfect

Finally, and most importantly: reading scientific papers is a skill that develops with practice, not overnight. To make progress, find dedicated time in your weekly schedule for active reading and stick to it [5]. Stay focused on what is relevant to your field, but remain open to papers outside your specialty; innovation often happens at the boundaries.

Practical Roadmap

How to read a scientific paper: a practical roadmap (inspired by [4–6], realised with draw.io)

Further reading 

If you want to learn more about CASP, CONSORT or PRISMA checklists, you can read the following papers: 

Checklist	Type of articles concerned	Main authors/organizations responsible	References
CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme)	Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including extensions for nonpharmacologic, noninferiority, equivalence, and pragmatic trials	CASP UK (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme), developed by an interdisciplinary team of educators and methodologists	[7]
CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials)	The CONSORT Group (an international collaboration of clinical trialists, statisticians, epidemiologists, and biomedical editors)	The CONSORT Group (international collaboration of clinical trialists, statisticians, epidemiologists, and biomedical editors)	[8]
PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)	Systematic reviews and meta-analyses	PRISMA Group (international group of authors and methodologists)	[9]

References

1.          Hubbard KE, Dunbar SD. Perceptions of scientific research literature and strategies for reading papers depend on academic career stage. PloS One. 2017;12:e0189753. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189753

2.         Erren TC, Cullen P, Erren M. How to surf today’s information tsunami: on the craft of effective reading. Med Hypotheses. 2009;73:278–9. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2009.05.002

3.          Shiely F, Gallagher K, Millar SR. How, and why, science and health researchers read scientific (IMRAD) papers. PloS One. 2024;19:e0297034. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297034

4.          Subramanyam R. Art of reading a journal article: Methodically and effectively. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol JOMFP. 2013;17:65–70. doi: 10.4103/0973-029X.110733

5.          Sun T-T. Active versus passive reading: how to read scientific papers? Natl Sci Rev. 2020;7:1422–7. doi: 10.1093/nsr/nwaa130

6.          Durbin CG. How to read a scientific research paper. Respir Care. 2009;54:1366–71.

7.          Rosati P, Porzsolt F. A practical educational tool for teaching child-care hospital professionals attending evidence-based practice courses for continuing medical education to appraise internal validity in systematic reviews. J Eval Clin Pract. 2013;19:648–52. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01889.x

8.          Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, et al. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c332. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c332

9.          Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:e1-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006