Priya Singh: How to Write the Discussion of a Research Paper
Priya Singh, Founder of Research Made Clear, Research Advisor at IFERP, shared a post on LinkedIn:
“You can have perfect results… and still get rejected.
A weak Discussion is one of the fastest ways to lose your reviewer.
Not because your research is bad.
But because your thinking is not visible.
Here’s how to get it right
- Interpret your results
Don’t repeat findings. Explain what they mean in relation to your research question.
- Connect with existing literature
Where do you agree? Where do you challenge?
This is where your work enters the academic conversation.
- Explain unexpected findings
Reviewers value honesty and reasoning more than ‘perfect results.’
- Highlight implications
Why should anyone care?
What changes because of your findings?
- State limitations clearly
This shows maturity, not weakness.
- Suggest future research
Show that your work opens doors, not closes them.
Think of your Discussion like this:
- Results: What you found
- Discussion: Why it matters
If your Results show your work…
Your Discussion proves your intellectual contribution.
Before you submit your paper or thesis, ask yourself:
‘Have I explained my thinking… or just described my data?’
That one question can change your entire paper.
PS: What feedback do you most often get on your Discussion?
Share in the comments.
Repost to help someone struck in writing.
Follow Dr Priya Singh, Founder Research Made Clear for more insights.
For research tutorials and AI tool guides, subscribe to my YT channel.”

Stay updated with Hemostasis Today.
-
Sep 5, 2026, 16:28Jon Douglas: Imperial College London Review Maps Key Pathways in Autoimmune Thrombosis
-
Sep 5, 2026, 16:21Kelly Anderson: Bilateral Foot Pain and Purple Toes – Spotting Vascular Complications in Polycythemia Vera
-
Sep 5, 2026, 16:16Hazem Abosheaishaa: Beta-Blocker Selection Matters – Multi-Institutional Cohort Insights on PVT and Survival in Cirrhosis
-
Sep 5, 2026, 16:08Indre Ceponiene: Major Gaps in Secondary Cardiovascular Prevention Across Europe
-
Sep 5, 2026, 16:03W. Alberto Sifuentes Giraldo: Why Obstetric Cases Are Missed Under 2023 ACR/EULAR APS Criteria
-
Sep 5, 2026, 15:58Srikanth Nalla: A Case of Saddle Pulmonary Embolism
-
Sep 5, 2026, 15:55COPD-specific Pulmonary Embolism Diagnostic Strategy – Thrombosis and Haemostasis
-
Sep 5, 2026, 15:41Sam Tsimikas on Lp(a) HORIZON Topline Results – What Missed Endpoints Mean for Cardiovascular Risk
-
Sep 5, 2026, 15:32Stefano Garzon: SELUTION DeNovo HBR – Weren’t HBR Patients Supposed to Bleed More with DES?