Scientific Publications¶

Title
Authors and Affiliations
Abstract
Keywords

1. Introduction
   - Background and rationale
   - Research gap
   - Objectives/hypothesis

2. Methods
   - Study design
   - Participants/samples
   - Interventions/exposures
   - Outcomes
   - Statistical analysis

3. Results
   - Participant flow
   - Baseline characteristics
   - Primary outcomes
   - Secondary outcomes
   - Adverse events

4. Discussion
   - Key findings
   - Comparison with literature
   - Strengths and limitations
   - Clinical implications
   - Future directions

5. Conclusions

Acknowledgments
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
Supplementary Material

# Weak Title
Study of a New Drug for Diabetes

# Strong Title
Efficacy and Safety of Semaglutide Versus Placebo for
Weight Management in Adults with Obesity: A Randomized
Controlled Trial

## Abstract

**Background**: [Context and knowledge gap]

**Objective**: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of [Drug]
compared to placebo in patients with [condition].

**Methods**: We conducted a randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled trial at 25 centers. Adults aged 18-65
with [condition] were randomized 1:1 to [Drug] or placebo
for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in [measure].

**Results**: Of 500 randomized patients, 450 completed the
study. [Drug] significantly improved [measure] compared to
placebo (mean difference: -2.5; 95% CI: -3.2 to -1.8;
p<0.001). Adverse events were similar between groups.

**Conclusions**: [Drug] demonstrated efficacy for [condition]
with an acceptable safety profile.

## Introduction

[Paragraph 1: Establish importance]
[Condition] affects approximately 10 million adults in the
United States and is associated with significant morbidity.

[Paragraph 2: Describe current knowledge]
Current treatments include [options], but many patients do
not achieve adequate disease control.

[Paragraph 3: Identify the gap]
Although [prior research], the efficacy of [approach] in
[specific population] has not been established.

[Paragraph 4: State objectives]
We conducted this randomized controlled trial to evaluate
the efficacy and safety of [Drug] compared to placebo in
adults with [condition].

## Methods

### Study Design and Participants

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled trial conducted at 25 sites in the
United States between January 2023 and December 2023.

Adults aged 18-65 years were eligible if they had:
- Confirmed diagnosis of [condition] per [criteria]
- [Measure] score ≥ 10 at screening
- Stable background therapy for ≥4 weeks

Key exclusion criteria included:
- History of [condition]
- Current use of [medications]
- Pregnancy or breastfeeding

### Randomization and Blinding

Patients were randomized 1:1 to [Drug] or placebo using
a computer-generated sequence with block sizes of 4 and 6.
Randomization was stratified by [factors].

### Interventions

Patients received [Drug] 100 mg or matching placebo
once daily for 12 weeks.

### Outcomes

The primary outcome was change from baseline in [measure]
at Week 12. Secondary outcomes included...

### Statistical Analysis

We calculated that 200 patients per group would provide
90% power to detect a difference of 2.0 points...

## Results

### Study Population

From January to June 2023, we screened 650 patients and
randomized 500 (250 per group). Figure 1 shows the patient
flow. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups
(Table 1).

### Primary Outcome

[Drug] significantly improved [measure] compared to placebo.
The mean change from baseline was -5.2 (SD 3.1) in the
[Drug] group and -2.7 (SD 3.0) in the placebo group
(mean difference: -2.5; 95% CI: -3.2 to -1.8; p<0.001).

### Secondary Outcomes

[Drug] also improved [secondary measure] (Table 2).
Response rates (≥50% improvement) were 65% vs 40%
(relative risk: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.35-1.97).

### Safety

Adverse events occurred in 45% of [Drug] patients and
42% of placebo patients. The most common adverse events
were headache (12% vs 8%) and nausea (8% vs 4%).
Serious adverse events were rare and similar between groups.

## Discussion

[Paragraph 1: Summarize key findings]
In this randomized controlled trial, [Drug] significantly
improved [measure] compared to placebo in adults with
[condition], with an acceptable safety profile.

[Paragraph 2-3: Compare with literature]
Our findings are consistent with [prior study], which
showed... However, the magnitude of effect was greater
than reported by [other study], possibly because...

[Paragraph 4: Strengths]
Strengths of this study include the large sample size,
rigorous randomization, and diverse patient population.

[Paragraph 5: Limitations]
This study has limitations. First, the 12-week duration
may not capture long-term effects. Second, we excluded
patients with [condition], limiting generalizability.

[Paragraph 6: Implications]
These findings suggest [Drug] may be a useful option for
patients who do not respond to current therapies.

[Paragraph 7: Future directions]
Future studies should evaluate long-term efficacy and
compare [Drug] with active comparators.

## Title
[Descriptive title - 15 words maximum]

## Background
[2-3 sentences on rationale]

## Methods
[Study design, population, interventions, outcomes]

## Results
[Key findings with numbers]

## Conclusions
[Main takeaway - 1-2 sentences]

# Too Wordy
We conducted an investigation to assess and evaluate
the potential efficacy of the novel therapeutic agent...

# Concise
We evaluated [Drug] efficacy in a randomized trial.