Writing a paper, results and discussion – day 3: describing the limitations of your results
Free PreviewPhrases for describing results accurately and avoiding certainty
In many instances how authors present findings may be cultural, for example whether an author is modest about results or overly enthusiastic in their writing may partly depend on the audience that they are used to communicating with and the cultural expectations. However, in all cases it is worth being careful to phrase results accurately. Where it is a reality that results are not 100% conclusive it is important to state this. Where there is the possibility of alternative explanations it is important to state that also. Below are some phrases to help you describe the limitations of what you have discovered.
Cautious interpretation of results
These findings showed a 60% level of accuracy…
Of the four groups, the findings in group A only showed positive…
From the results it is not conclusive that…
These results could be biased by…
The small sample size means that further research…
These results need to be interpreted with caution because…
Although [x] has been proven, it is not the greatest factor in determining…
These findings cannot be extrapolated for the following reasons…
The discrepancy between the two groups may be due…
These findings are not consistent with…
Alternative explanations
These results show the possible / probable / likely cause of…
| The bleaching of coral reefs | may be could be might be is almost certainly |
due to an increase in sea temperature. |
| It may be It is likely It could be It is possible It is probable It is almost certain |
that the bleaching of coral reefs | is due to an increase in sea temperature. |
| A likely explanation A probable explanation A possible explanation |
is that | coral bleaching | is a result of a rise in sea temperatures. |
This inconsistency could be due to…
A possible explanation is that…
It seems possible that…
There are several explanations for this…
These results contradict previous studies… which may be due to…
The likely causes of this difference are that…
It is important not to overstate this result given that…
It is not clear why…
These data do not adequately explain…
The reasons remain unclear…
Read through the extract below to see how these authors have handled the various limitations of knowledge from their study.
Identification and functional characterization of BICD2 as a candidate disease gene in an consanguineous family with dilated cardiomyopathy
Discussion
Most previously reported familial DCM cases are caused by variants inherited in an autosomal dominant pattern [3]. Currently, more than 250 variant genes spanning > 10 gene ontologies have been suggested to contribute to inherited DCM [4]. However, the heritability of DCM cannot be completely explained by the variants discovered thus far. Here, we searched for the pathological variant causing DCM in a consanguineous family and discovered BICD2 as a novel DCM candidate disease gene. Notably, the inheritance mode of DCM in the consanguineous family was autosomal recessive, suggesting that loss of function contributes to the disease.
BICD2 is a dynein-activating adaptor protein that was previously implicated as a causative gene in autosomal dominant spinal muscular atrophy. Individuals carrying heterozygous missense variants in BICD2 exhibit muscle weakness and atrophy predominantly of the proximal lower limbs. However, the inheritance mode of BICD2 in our DCM family was autosomal recessive. None of the previous DCM genetic researches have reported functional role of BICD2 or the association of BICD2 to DCM. Our functional characterization of BICD2 in DCM may advance our understanding of the genetic underpinnings of DCM, facilitating early genetic screening of familial DCM.
However, a limitation of our work is that we have not yet proven a direct relationship between the BICD2 variant identified and phenotypes associated with an enlarged heart. We will continue to explore the cardiac dysfunction caused by this BICD2 variant. We will continue our work in elucidating molecular mechanism underlying the pathogenesis of familial DCM.
This extract is taken from: Luo, K., Zheng, C., Luo, R. et al. Identification and functional characterization of BICD2 as a candidate disease gene in an consanguineous family with dilated cardiomyopathy. BMC Med Genomics 15, 189 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12920-022-01349-y
Useful phrases from the extract
Most previously reported: ‘most’ means not all
cannot be completely explained by: ‘not completely’ means it is not certain or proven
suggesting that: ‘suggesting’ is a vague word that avoids certainty
previously implicated as a causative: ‘implicated’ is a nice description meaning that a cause was considered, but there was no proof or certainty that it is involved, in the same way that someone was implicated in a crime without firm evidence
may advance our understanding: the word ‘may’ adds vagueness, ‘may’ also means ‘may not’
a limitation of our work is … not yet proven a direct relationship: here the author adds caution by using the words ‘limitation’ and ‘not proven’
Further study for this week
This week you can try to write a results or discussion section describing the main findings of a recent study. Try the short quiz below to test your understanding.