Researchers publishing in clinical and epidemiological fields now have a detailed roadmap for two of the most demanding parts of a scientific paper. Writing in Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, Claire Gudex and Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde present a step-by-step guide to structuring the Methods and Results sections, the second instalment in a three-part series that also covers the Background and Discussion sections. Their central message is that these sections succeed or fail on two qualities: transparency and completeness, which together allow readers to understand exactly what was done and to judge whether the findings deserve trust.
The authors argue that the Methods section serves four distinct purposes. It should enable other researchers to reproduce the study, since a basic principle of research is that repeating a study in exactly the same way should give the same or similar results. It should demonstrate that the work was conducted ethically, with safeguards for participants and the confidentiality of their data. It should show that the chosen study design fits the research objectives. And it should indicate how the investigators maximized data quality and minimized the risk of bias. In short, the Methods section is where readers decide whether to believe the findings.
The practical approach begins before any data are analysed. The authors emphasize that researchers do not need completed analyses to plan these sections, but they do need settled research objectives and a clear picture of the study design, ethical considerations, sample source, recruitment strategy, data collection frequency, measurement tools, and variables of interest. From there, they recommend building an outline of headings with short notes underneath, which co-authors can review for logical order and coverage before full sentences are written.
For the Methods section, the guide proposes roughly seven headings: description of the study design, ethical considerations, information about obtaining the study sample, any interventions or control groups, what data were collected and when and how, data quality, and how the data were analysed. The authors suggest imagining that a colleague wants to repeat the study and must be talked through it step by step by telephone, then writing down the instructions in the order that would make most sense. Chronological ordering is usually easiest for readers, though organizing by variable or by research objective can also work if it suits the study.
Several of the steps come with technical detail. The design description may need a mini-introduction for complicated projects, outlining timing of data collections, comparisons made, and links between study parts, sometimes with a supporting figure. The ethics subsection should record consents, approvals, register data permissions, and any statement that ethical permission was not required under national laws. The analysis subsection covers data storage and cleaning, handling of missing data, the type of analysis each objective requires, named statistical tests, the significance level, and the software used. Long technical descriptions of tests or procedures can be moved to additional files or referenced, and very specific details can be offered as available from the authors on request.
The Results section, by contrast, must contain no interpretation. The authors state plainly that judgments such as to our surprise belong in the Discussion, and that results not covered by a research objective should not appear at all; if extra findings exist, a further objective is probably needed. A typical Results section runs three to five items: the final sample size relative to the invited or expected sample, a description of the study sample, any preliminary information such as pilot results or reliability tests, answers to each research objective in turn, and any post-hoc analyses.
On the perennial question of where sample size belongs, the guide is precise. The Methods section states the intended sample size and how it was to be achieved, while the Results section reports the size and characteristics of the final sample actually obtained, including numbers and percentages at every follow-up point, with the correct initial numerator used at each stage. Flowcharts are required for randomized controlled trials under CONSORT, and if a response rate is unknown, for example when the total number of attending patients is unknown, that should be stated explicitly. Sample characteristics such as age, sex, education, and disease severity are usually best gathered in a baseline table, often broken down by subgroup.
The authors also offer advice on tables and figures, insisting each one stand alone. A reader unfamiliar with the study should grasp the main message from the title or legend, the content, and the abbreviation explanations alone, so generic titles such as Descriptive table are unhelpful. Numbers of participants and observations must be transparent, ideally within the table when they differ between variables, and in the legend for figures, where omission is common. Text should summarize rather than repeat table contents, non-significant findings need only be flagged as such, and rounded percentages are often more memorable than overly precise ones.
Artificial intelligence receives a cautious treatment. The authors acknowledge that AI can help with grammar, refining search strings or coding methods, and organizing complicated data into tables, but they judge the current dangers greater than the advantages. AI can alter variable names, invent references, generate nonsensical diagrams that have led to retractions, and expose confidential text shared with the tool. Under the Vancouver authorship recommendations, authors remain accountable for all aspects of a manuscript, and any AI use should be acknowledged, with prompts potentially supplied in a supplementary file. The guide closes by pointing researchers to the EQUATOR Network reporting guidelines, to be used as a checklist after drafting rather than a starting template, and by reminding readers that transparency and completeness matter more than elegant prose.
Subject of Research: A practical guide to structuring the Methods and Results sections of clinical and epidemiological research articles
Article Title: Practical guide to structuring the Methods and Results sections in clinical and epidemiological studies
Article References: Gudex, C., & Leboeuf-Yde, C. (2026). Practical guide to structuring the Methods and Results sections in clinical and epidemiological studies. Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, 34(1), Article 44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12998-026-00644-0
Image Credits: AI Generated
DOI: 10.1186/s12998-026-00644-0
Keywords: scientific writing, Methods section, Results section, clinical research, epidemiology, research methodology, reporting guidelines, transparency, study design, tables and figures, artificial intelligence, academic integrity
News Source: Phoebe Ingram. (October 29, 2026). How to Write Methods and Results Sections That Readers Can Trust. Scienmag.
