1. Based on the given description of the study and the data presented by lecturer, determine what type of study design it is.
2. Based on your own data that you use in your research, determine the study design.
3. Based on the project proposals determine which ethical issues should have to be satisfied.

1. Identify the research problem: Read a short study summary and underline the main research question.
2. Formulate a hypothesis: Based on the problem, write a clear and testable hypothesis.
3. Define the study aim: Summarize in one sentence the primary aim of the study.
4. Distinguish between primary and secondary objectives: Identify which objectives are central and which are supportive.
5. Critique clarity: Evaluate whether the introduction provides enough background to justify the hypothesis.

1. List materials and participants: Identify the types of materials, equipment, or subjects used in a provided study scenario.
2. Describe study design: Determine whether the study is observational, experimental, cross-sectional, longitudinal, etc.
3. Outline procedures step-by-step: Rewrite the methods in your own words, focusing on clarity and reproducibility.
4. Identify variables: Distinguish between independent, dependent, and confounding variables.
5. Assess ethical considerations: Note whether ethical approval and informed consent are addressed.

1. Read a short results section and identify sentences that are clear and concise versus sentences that are too verbose or vague.
2. Rewrite a complex paragraph from the results section to make it more direct and data-focused, avoiding unnecessary interpretation.
3. Highlight any statistical values (p-values, confidence intervals) in the text and check whether they are properly reported.

1. Examine a table and identify if the variables and units are clearly labeled.
2. Suggest improvements to make a table easier to read, e.g., reorder rows/columns, add footnotes, clarify abbreviations.
3. Create a small table using sample data (e.g., patient demographics or lab results) following biomedical reporting standards.

1. Review a figure (bar chart, line graph, scatter plot) and assess whether the axes are labeled, units are included, and legends are clear.
2. Write a figure legend that is informative, concise, and self-explanatory, so the figure can be understood without reading the main text.
3. Suggest improvements to an example figure to enhance clarity, contrast, or interpretability.

Practice writing a mini “Results” paragraph integrating one table and one figure effectively.

1. Read the results section and identify the key findings. Summarize them in 2–3 sentences.
2. Compare the results with the study hypothesis. Do they support, partially support, or contradict it? Explain why.

1. Compare their results with previous studies accuratelly and using relevant literature data.
2. Locate a reference in the literature that supports or contradicts with your results.

Using a summary of a study (or your own study data), write a concise abstract (150–250 words) that includes:

• Background / rationale
• Study aim and hypothesis
• Methods
• Key results
• Main conclusion

1. Review a scenario describing contributions of multiple researchers. Decide who qualifies as an author and who should be acknowledged only.
2. Compare your decision with the ICMJE authorship criteria. Are there any differences? Explain.

1. Match each contributor in a sample study to the appropriate CRediT role(s) (e.g., Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Writing – Original Draft).
2. Rewrite the author contribution section of a sample paper using CRediT terminology.