Reporting the Results of an In-Vitro Experiment

Introduction

The results section of a research paper is where the author reports the findings of the study as a result of the methodology applied. Hence, this section lies right after the methods section. The author should simply state the findings without bias or interpretation.

It is always helpful to look into a reporting guideline when constructing a research paper. This helps to prevent the author from missing key components from the study, hence enhancing the quality of the paper. The EQUATOR network (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) is one of the resources that provides health researchers a catalogue of checklists.

Link:

https://www.equator-network.org/

---

CRIS guidelines

A checklist we can use to write down a research paper with an In-Vitro experiment is the CRIS guidelines (Checklist for Reporting In-vitro Studies). The following guideline can be accessed here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4127685/

Components:

• Sample size calculation (methods section)

• Meaningful difference between groups (methods section)

• Sample preparation and handling (methods section)

• Allocation sequence, randomisation and blinding (methods section)

• Statistical analysis (results section)

---

Sample Results Section

Statistical Analysis (example)

The study investigated the mRNA expression of BAX and BCL2 in six groups: control, acetaldehyde, acetaldehyde + sorafenib 10nm, acetaldehyde + alpha-mangostin 10nm, acetaldehyde + alpha-mangostin 20nm, and alpha-mangostin 10nm. The descriptive statistics shown as mean and standard deviation for mRNA expression of BAX and BCL2 were reported in Table 1. and Table 2. respectively. (Here you re-introduce the independent and dependent variable to the readers). Cells treated with acetaldehyde were shown to have reduced mRNA expression of BAX compared to the control. In contrast, cells treated with both acetaldehyde and sorafenib or alpha-mangostin, and solely alpha-mangostin showed increased mRNA expression of BAX compared to the control group. (Here you describe the trends, you may also use words such as twice more compared to... and such). The data satisfied the assumptions for a parametric One-Way ANOVA analysis. Shapiro-Wilk p > 0.05, Levene's test for homogeneity p > 0.05.

A One-Way ANOVA analysis revealed significant differences in the mean mRNA expression fo BAX between control and treatment groups, F(5, 23) = 6.16, p = 0.04.

A post hoc Tukey test revealed that the mean mRNA expression of BAX between control group and treatment group (acetaldehyde) was not statistically significant (mean difference = 11.25, 95% CI [3.47, 19.03]. (Report the statistical analysis for all comparisons within groups)

And you are basically done...

Don't forget to attach relevant tables and figures.