1. How to write a basic research article to be relevant for the readers of European Urology Jean-Nicolas CORNU Associate Editor European Urology

2. Context Basic research –L–Leads to new knowledge –P–Provides scientific capital –I–Is the fund from which the practical applications of knowledge must be drawn National Science Foundation, 1953

3. Courtesy of the National Cancer Institute (NCI/NIH) Cancer Functional Kidney/stones Andrology/male Urogynecology

4. European Urology context High-impact Broad readership Mostly focused on clinical issues / patients care « Relative relevance » Clinical implications / applications Translational work Please tell us the whole story…

5. Reasons for rejection Too weak (major issue for basic science) Too focused (one slice of salami) Not relevant for all readers (model) Results consisting in purely technical aspects Please, understand the concept of primary rejection… We DO WANT YOUR BEST WORK IN EUR UROL

6. How to optimize TOPIC: is it urology or about urology RESEARCH QUESTION: relevant for a urologist ? RATIONALE: make it obvious for a urologist – it requires a clinical context METHODS: describe everything – DO USE supplementary data / supplementary methods RESULTS: make your work « talk » to a urologist optimize your displays (spend enough t/e/m) – DO USE supplementary data / supplementary methods INTERPRETATION: be accurate – and relevant

7. Good examples Self explanatory title Could be of interest for urologists

8. Good examples

9. Rationale/objectives … … … General context Quick summary of known priciples Rationale for studying mechanisms Clear statement Quickly say why does it make sense

10. Methods Enough detailed and referenced to be reproduced Use of appendix

11. Methods Keep it simple, organized and straight forward Descriptions should be crisp and accurate (word count!) – use suppl data Statistics need to be clearly defined (it‘s your tool – as well as subjects – will be reviewed !!) Ethical permission has to be given – references have to be adequate If the methods section is unclear, the ms will fail!

12. Presenting results

13. Results

16. Figures

17. Make it perfect (revision?)

18. Up to… what you want Supplementary content is like « always necessary » in a big basic research Always better than publishing – the ideas – then methods – Results in salami – Applications/extensions you have already in the box Tell a story !!

19. Presenting results rules Short but answering the questions Refer to pictures and tables - The text is your speech - Science is in the tables and figures Use sub-sections help to enhance readibility Be accurate, credible (units!) Do not overinterpret at this stage

20. Discussion Not too long Put you results in perspective Explian the potential relevance Generate (reasonable) new hypothesis Do not make pure statements Do not sell the paper at this time: Less is more, data are everything

21. Conclusion Study needs to be relevant for clinicians ++++ Original / Novel If the study is not of interest for a broad readership in Eur Urol, it may be more adequate for submission to a specialized journal (e.g. if you describe a new method or a specific technique): you won‘t lose time Critical importance of material & methods Figures and tables are th most important part of the work and need your energy Discussion: put in perspective Sufficient amount of data / convincing techniques to support the conclusion : do not over interpret