Original Research Article

An original research article would present new research findings, methodologies, or theories in the field of health sciences or healthcare. These articles follow a specific structure, which typically includes the following sections:

TITLE
The title of the manuscript should be brief avoiding any forms of acronyms. A title of a research article should be concise, informative, and accurately reflect the content of the study. It should give readers a clear idea of the main focus or purpose of the research.  

ABSTRACT
It should contain a brief summary of the study. The abstract of the manuscript should not exceed 250 words and must be structured into following separate sections:
Background: It should describe the context and purpose/objectives of the study
Methods: It should contain the materials and method included in the research in brief.
Results: The main findings of the study should be written briefly.
Conclusion: It should contain what the author concludes from the result of his/her research work with its potential implications.
Keywords: It should contain five to eight keywords representing the main content of the article.

INTRODUCTION
It provides background information on the topic, states the research question or hypothesis, and outlines the purpose or objectives of the study. It should be written in a way that is comprehensible to researchers without specialist knowledge in that area and must clearly state the background to the research and its aims. It should contain the brief introduction of the research topic, relevant literature, rationale of the study with research objectives. The section should end with a brief statement of what is being reported in the article.  

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Describes in detail the research design, participants or subjects involved, data collection methods, and statistical analyses used. The methods section includes  the information about the design of the study, study duration, study population, samling technique and sample size calculation. Inclusion and exclusion criteria also need to be reported. The variables of interest should be defined well and the methods adopted, the type of materials or instruments used should be described in sufficient detail to enable replication by other researchers.

Information about the ethics approval of the research by a recognized body (along with the reference letter number), registration in case of the clinical trials and informed consent from the participants should appear in this section.

RESULTS
Presents the findings of the study, often using tables, figures, and statistical measures to support the results. In the result section, only the main finding can be kept along with the use of tables and/or figures. Each table and figure should be described briefly. 
Figures: Only relevant figures or pictures (3 to 4 in number) should be used in a manuscript. The legend appears at the bottom of each figure. For example, Figure 1: Age-wise distribution of the disease. Each figure should be cited in the text in consecutive numerical order. Please note that it is the sole responsibility of the author(s) to obtain permission from the copyright holder to reproduce figures or tables. The citation of figures is preferably kept at the end of the paragraph that describes it within a bracket. e.g. (Figure 1)
Tables: Only relevant tables (3 to 5 in number) should be used ina manuscript. Table legend is placed above the table. For example, Table 1: Clinical profile of diseases. Each table should be cited in the text in consecutive numerical order referring to the table number instead of saying the table above or below. The citation of the table is preferably kept at the end of the paragraph that describes it within a bracket e.g. (Table 1)
Statistical analysis: Instead of reporting the results of inferential stastistics as p value < 0.05 or statistically significant, reporting the exact p value is more informative. Further, the name of the test applied along the relevant statistical parameters (test statistic, degrees of freedom, confidence interval, p value and effect size) should be mentioned for each analysis. Also the direction of association should be mentioned in case of statistically significant findings i.e. in which direction (increasing or decreasing) the dependent variable changes as the independent variable is changed (increased or decreased).

DISCUSSION
Interprets the results, discusses their implications, compares them with previous research, and explores potential limitations or biases. In the discussion section, the main findings and their links with previous research should be kept. The views of the author with evidence can also be kept to strengthen the links. The limitations of the study have to be included in the discussion section. 

CONCLUSION
Summarizes the main findings of the study and their significance, often highlighting the implications for clinical practice or further research. This should state clearly the main conclusions of the research and give a clear explanation of their importance and relevance. In the conclusion section, the crux of the finding has to be kept. Recommendation/s based on the findings may be included.

 Acknowledgements 
All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship (who provided purely technical help, writing assistance, or a department chair who provided only general support) should be listed in an acknowledgements section without describing contribution. Source(s) of funding for each author, and for the manuscript preparation may also be included. 

CITATIONS & REFERENCES:
JKAHS uses the Vancouver system as specified by the Citing Medicine. Only articles, datasets and abstracts that have  been published or are in press, or are available through public e-print/preprint servers, may be cited; unpublished abstracts, unpublished data and personal communications should not be included in the reference list, but may be included in the text and referred to as "unpublished observations" or "personal communications" giving the names of the involved researchers. Obtaining permission to quote personal communications and unpublished data from the cited colleagues is the responsibility of the author. 

STROBE Statement—checklist for Observational Study

The EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Network is an international initiative that seeks to improve the reliability and value of published health research literature by promoting transparent and accurate reporting and wider use of robust reporting guidelines. Following is the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) statement, guidelines for reporting observational studies.

STROBE Statement—checklist of items that should be included in reports of observational studies

	Item No	Recommendation	Page No
Title and abstract	1	(a) Indicate the study’s design with a commonly used term in the title or the abstract
		(b) Provide in the abstract an informative and balanced summary of what was done and what was found
Introduction
Background/ rationale	2	Explain the scientific background and rationale for the investigation being reported
Objectives	3	State specific objectives, including any prespecified hypotheses
Methods
Study design	4	Present key elements of study design early in the paper
Setting	5	Describe the setting, locations, and relevant dates, including periods of recruitment, exposure, follow-up, and data collection
Participants	6	(a) Cohort study—Give the eligibility criteria, and the sources and methods of selection of participants. Describe methods of follow-up Case-control study—Give the eligibility criteria, and the sources and methods of case ascertainment and control selection. Give the rationale for the choice of cases and controls Cross-sectional study—Give the eligibility criteria, and the sources and methods of selection of participants
		(b) Cohort study—For matched studies, give matching criteria and number of exposed and unexposed Case-control study—For matched studies, give matching criteria and the number of controls per case
Variables	7	Clearly define all outcomes, exposures, predictors, potential confounders, and effect modifiers. Give diagnostic criteria, if applicable
Data sources/ measurement	8*	For each variable of interest, give sources of data and details of methods of assessment (measurement). Describe comparability of assessment methods if there is more than one group
Bias	9	Describe any efforts to address potential sources of bias
Study size	10	Explain how the study size was arrived at
Quantitative variables	11	Explain how quantitative variables were handled in the analyses. If applicable, describe which groupings were chosen and why
Statistical methods	12	(a) Describe all statistical methods, including those used to control for confounding
		(b) Describe any methods used to examine subgroups and interactions
		(c) Explain how missing data were addressed
		(d) Cohort study—If applicable, explain how loss to follow-up was addressed Case-control study—If applicable, explain how matching of cases and controls was addressed Cross-sectional study—If applicable, describe analytical methods taking account of sampling strategy
		(e) Describe any sensitivity analyses

 

Results
Participants	13*	(a) Report numbers of individuals at each stage of study—eg numbers potentially eligible, examined for eligibility, confirmed eligible, included in the study, completing follow-up, and analysed
		(b) Give reasons for non-participation at each stage
		(c) Consider use of a flow diagram
Descriptive data	14*	(a) Give characteristics of study participants (eg demographic, clinical, social) and information on exposures and potential confounders
		(b) Indicate number of participants with missing data for each variable of interest
		(c) Cohort study—Summarise follow-up time (eg, average and total amount)
Outcome data	15*	Cohort study—Report numbers of outcome events or summary measures over time
		Case-control study—Report numbers in each exposure category, or summary measures of exposure
		Cross-sectional study—Report numbers of outcome events or summary measures
Main results	16	(a) Give unadjusted estimates and, if applicable, confounder-adjusted estimates and their precision (eg, 95% confidence interval). Make clear which confounders were adjusted for and why they were included
		(b) Report category boundaries when continuous variables were categorized
		(c) If relevant, consider translating estimates of relative risk into absolute risk for a meaningful time period
Other analyses	17	Report other analyses done—eg analyses of subgroups and interactions, and sensitivity analyses
Discussion
Key results	18	Summarise key results with reference to study objectives
Limitations	19	Discuss limitations of the study, taking into account sources of potential bias or imprecision. Discuss both direction and magnitude of any potential bias
Interpretation	20	Give a cautious overall interpretation of results considering objectives, limitations, multiplicity of analyses, results from similar studies, and other relevant evidence
Generalisability	21	Discuss the generalisability (external validity) of the study results
Other information
Funding	22	Give the source of funding and the role of the funders for the present study and, if applicable, for the original study on which the present article is based

*Give information separately for cases and controls in case-control studies and, if applicable, for exposed and unexposed groups in cohort and cross-sectional studies.

Note: An Explanation and Elaboration article discusses each checklist item and gives methodological background and published examples of transparent reporting. The STROBE checklist is best used in conjunction with this article (freely available on the Web sites of PLoS Medicine at http://www.plosmedicine.org/, Annals of Internal Medicine at http://www.annals.org/, and Epidemiology at http://www.epidem.com/). Information on the STROBE Initiative is available at www.strobe-statement.org.

REFERENCES
https://www.equator-network.org/reporting-guidelines/strobe/