![]()
17
| 2 | 2008
Klinisk Biokemi i Norden
(Fortsætter side 18)
Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen:
1. Seven had published as first author, but only one
in more than one article. Ten had produced and pre-
sented posters and four of those more than once. Seven
of the participants had no prior experience.
Study conditions, food and accommodation
The experiment took place in Finse under arctic
conditions in the rough mountains between Oslo and
Bergen. Finse is the southernmost part of Europe with
an arctic climate and is only accessible by train. At this
remote location and car free environment Finse Hotel
is located at the railway station and consists of a nearly
100 years old oversized mountain chalet with nice cosy
rooms. The kitchen is excellent and during the experi-
ment the participants were feed with a high calorie diet
of well prepared food.
The experiment in details
The experiment started at 10.30 am day 1 at the train
to Finse where the participants were given the course
material of 63 pages including the necessary data for the
manuscript as well as background literature. The experi-
ment in Finse was scheduled from 4.30 pm at day 1 to
11.30 am at day 4 with main working days of 12 hours.
The experiment consisted of the following disciplines:
Work in Groups:
The participants were divided into 5 groups of 3-4
persons plus a mentor from the SJCLI Editorial Board.
Selection was done according to nationality, but not sex,
education, prior scientific work or working experience.
The first task was to prepare a plan for the manuscript.
A total of 685 minutes were scheduled in 7 working
sessions. Material and Method: 180 minutes, Results:
190 minutes, Discussion 150 minutes and finally
Introduction, Abstract and “last finish” 165 minutes.
Plenary discussion
Five plenary discussions (total duration about 260 min-
utes) were arranged for the groups to share experiences
about the writing process and to present their work.
Structured lectures:
The participants were also exposed to 13 structured
lectures. Half of them concerning aspects of the
IMRAD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results And
Discussion)
1
from a “how to write” or “how to struc-
ture” perspective. The rest covered topics like author-
ship, ethics in scientific publishing, impact factor, lit-
erature search and finally what happens when you send
in your article to a Journal. The lectures were evaluated
regarding content and form using a VAS scale.
