IMRAD
Materials & Methods
Dr. Arun Mitra
Three Day workshop on Manuscript Preparation & Research Communication
3 - 5 June, 2026
Contents
- Background
- Why & When
- What & How
- Do’s and Don’ts
- Activity (if time permits)
Background
- I — why you did it
- M — what you did ← this session
- R — what you found
- D — what it means
Background
Methods + Results are the factual spine of a research paper.
Introduction and Discussion are interpretation
It is the only section that cannot be improved after the study is finished.
Read in one order, written in another
Readers move top-down
- Title
- Abstract
- Introduction
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion
Smart writers start in the middle
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion
- Introduction
- Abstract
- Title
Methodology is the Recipe of your Research
Chicken Biryani (serves 4)
- Marinate the chicken in yogurt and spices for
______ ____________________________- Layer rice and chicken in a heavy-bottomed pot
- Cook on
______heat for______minutes ____________________________- Garnish with fried onions and serve
What’s missing?
The same gaps in a Methods paragraph
“A
______study was conducted at______. Data were collected using a______.______statistical tests were applied. Results were considered significant at p < 0.05.”
Reviewers see this and react exactly as you did to the biryani.
Reproducibility Matters
Reproducibility Matters
Reproducibility Matters
Reproducibility Matters
Reproducibile Research
Reproducibility Spectrum
A useful trick
Write as if explaining it to yourself, two years from now, at a different hospital/lab setting with no access to your files.
Methods answers four questions about the study:
what
how
which
why
Who reads Methods and why
| READER | PURPOSE |
|---|---|
| Editors & reviewers | judge validity and whether the design fits the question |
| Replicators | reproduce your study |
| Systematic reviewers | assess risk of bias (Cochrane RoB maps onto your Methods) |
| Future you | remember exactly what you did |
Transparent methods signal credibility, not just compliance.
How much detail?
Include anything that affects the result or its reprodubility
Eligibility & exclusion criteria
Reagent concentrations, kit/catalogue & lot numbers, manufacturer
Instrument settings, calibration
Software name + version
Protocol deviations
Leave out trivia and interpretation
“A blue 500 ml beaker was used.”
Step-by-step re-description of a standard method → cite it instead
Results (no numbers of findings)
Why other methods are “worse”
When unsure, more detail, informed by journal limits, can always add supplementary material.
Tense & Voice
- Past tense
the study is done (“samples were analysed”). - Future tense is the tell-tale sign of a pasted protocol/grant.
- Voice is discipline-dependent (passive traditional in biomedicine, active increasingly fine); must follow the journal.
- Describe procedures in the order the Results will report them.
- Each procedure paragraph: purpose first, then how.
- “To compare X across groups, assay Y (maker) was performed…”
When to draft the Methods Section?
Draft the methods section before you start the research
Write it fresh, without looking at the protocol
What goes in Methods?
The Universal Core
Needed in every design
- Study design — named explicitly
- Setting — place, level of care, time frame
- Ethics — IEC no. + date, consent, registration
- Eligibility — inclusion / exclusion with cut-offs
- Sample size — with assumptions
- Variables & tools — named, validated
- Statistics — tests, model, effect measures
- Software — name + version (+ code)
Get these right and you clear the bar that applies to any study.
ICMJE: three drawers for your Methods
1 · Participants
selection, eligibility, source population
2 · Data & measurements
variables, tools, procedures
3 · Statistics
tests, models, software
If a sentence doesn’t fit one of these drawers, it probably belongs in Results.
From vague to precise
“A study was done to assess anaemia in pregnant women.”
\[ \downarrow \]
“We conducted a hospital-based cross-sectional study of pregnant women attending the antenatal clinic of a tertiary hospital, Jan–Dec 2024.”
“Ethical clearance was obtained.”
\[ \downarrow \]
“Approved by the IEC (IEC No. …/2024, dated 15 Jan 2024). Written informed consent was obtained. Prospectively registered with CTRI (CTRI/2024/…).”
“A sample of 200 was taken by convenience.”
\[ \downarrow \]
“Assuming 30% prevalence, 5% precision, 95% CI and design effect 1.5, the required size was 323; we enrolled 350 for 10% non-response.”
“Data were analysed using appropriate tests; p<0.05 was significant.”
\[ \downarrow \]
“χ² for categorical and t-test for continuous variables; multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, SES, reporting adjusted ORs with 95% CIs.”
“Analysis was done on computer.”
\[ \downarrow \]
“Analyses used R v4.4.1 with the tidyverse and survey packages.”
Study Design dictates which elements are necessary
- Exposure + outcome at one time point → no causal direction
- Sampling scheme is the headline (multistage / cluster / systematic)
- Size from prevalence + precision + design effect
- Guideline: STROBE
- Direction: outcome → exposure
- Controls from the same source population as cases
- State matching variables + ratio; ascertain exposure identically & blinded
- Guideline: STROBE
- Direction: exposure → outcome (measured at baseline first)
- Report follow-up duration + schedule
- Report attrition rate, reasons, censoring
- Guideline: STROBE
- Describe index test + reference standard to replication
- Pre-specify the cut-off; blind index ↔︎ reference
- Enrol consecutive suspected patients (real spectrum)
- Guideline: STARD
- Randomisation = 3 things: sequence generation · allocation concealment · implementation
- Blind participants, providers, assessors (and analysts)
- Describe intervention + comparator (TIDieR)
- Guideline: CONSORT
One question, four designs
metformin & preeclampsia
Cross-sectional → prevalence by current use
critical: sampling
Case-control → cases vs controls, past use
critical: control selection + recall bias
Cohort → users vs non-users, follow to delivery
critical: baseline timing + attrition
RCT → randomise to metformin vs placebo
critical: randomization + allocation concealment
Same question, but the centre of gravity shifts with design.
Explore equator-network.org
India specifics
IEC approval mandatory; the committee itself must be registered (CDSCO)
CTRI registration — prospective & mandatory for trials, voluntary for observational studies (ICMR 2017)
ICMR National Ethical Guidelines 2017
ICMR Data Protection and Data Privacy Act
ICMR Health Data Management Guidelines
Do’s and Don’ts
Don’t
- Leave the design unnamed
- Invent new study designs
- Write “appropriate tests”
- Give an unjustified sample size
- Compress ethics to one line
- Hide attrition
- Leave “usual care” undefined
Do
- Name design, setting, time frame
- Specify every test + model
- State all size assumptions
- Give IEC no./date + registration
- Report follow-up & losses
- Name tools, software + version
Write methods addressing the guideline. It almost always addressed all of the reviewer’s critique.
Illustration of Methods
Illustration of Methods
Illustration of Methods
Take Away Message
Write your Methods so a stranger could reproduce your study without frustration !!!
