Issue link: https://www.massageandbodyworkdigital.com/i/68013
THE DISCUSSION SECTION A good research article addresses its own strengths and limitations in an upfront manner so the reader can decide how much weight to give those factors. Think of the Discussion section of a research article as the most holistic or integrative of all the IMRaD sections. Each of the others (Introduction, Methods, and Results), described in this column previously, is more self-contained, focusing on more specific purposes. The Introduction section grounds the research question in previous work and introduces the hypothesis that the research tests; the Methods section outlines exactly how that hypothesis will be tested; the Results section describes what happened when it is tested. The Discussion section ties all these other sections together. It elaborates on their meanings, then makes recommendations for future research and practice. While researchers are careful to stick only to the facts in the previous sections, the Discussion section weaves context, imagination, and creativity with empirical facts. This combination interprets the study's results for the reader, building a solid foundation for taking knowledge to the next step—a new study or a real-life practice. DISCUSSION FRAMEWORK While this final section is usually called Discussion, you may see other names for it, depending on the author and the journal: Conclusions, Comments, Recommendations, or something similar. In any case, it is the final section of the main article. Some usual things to look for in this section include: 1. Grounding the study in its larger context (similar to what the Introduction did with the literature review and the hypothesis). 2. The strengths and weaknesses of this study and how they affected the big picture of the study's meaning (similar to how the Methods explained the issues involved in testing the research question). 3. What the Results mean (expanding on the Results section by adding interpretation). 4. What you should do with these Results (practice recommendations). 5. What future studies would be useful and why (research recommendations). Let's look at examples of how these elements may be presented in actual studies. After the last few months of reviewing the IMRaD format, you are in a position to appreciate what the authors have to say for themselves, with a minimum of interpretation. (Free, full-text references to the articles I cite are available in the links in the Notes section of this article.) GROUNDING THE STUDY We can begin by putting the Results back into the context of the literature connected with the subject of the study. In the acute-postoperative pain discussion from Mitchinson et al. and in the preterm infant discussion from Hernandez-Reif et al., respectively, researchers remind the reader how the present studies connect to groundwork laid in other research. The present study was designed to have adequate statistical power to detect the effect [of decreasing pain intensity and perception of "unpleasantness"] seen previously and to examine the short-term effect of massage on pain, anxiety, and functional recovery.1 visit massageandbodywork.com to access your digital magazine 131