Available via license: CC BY-SA 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
86 The Southwest Respiratory and Critical Care Chronicles 2016;4(15)
Kristin Messuri Writing Effective Paragraphs
Writing Effective Paragraphs
Kristin Messuri PhD
Scientific Writing
Corresponding author: Kristin Messuri, Ph.D.
Contact Information: kristin.messuri@gmail.com
DOI: 10.12746/swrccc 2016.0415.209
Almost all writers realize the need to group
sentences into paragraphs, yet many do not approach
this aspect of writing methodically. When asked how
they determined paragraph structure, writers often re-
veal that they did not have a strategy, indicate that the
paragraph divisions “just felt right,” or explain that they
began a new paragraph when the previous paragraph
seemed too long. Some of these responses suggest
a nascent understanding of paragraphing (organizing
sentences into a paragraph). A paragraph indicates
that the sentences it contains are related and some-
how distinct from the other sentences in the text. Due
to this function, paragraphs have been called “macro-
punctuation”: they function as rhetorical signiers that
help an audience understand a text.1
Thinking critically about how paragraphing af-
fects the delivery of a message can help authors to
enhance the clarity and organization of their writing.
Therefore, the remainder of this article will describe
paragraph structure, coherence, and cohesion, as
well as propose methods for revising paragraphs.
ParagraPh Structure
Authors must structure their paragraphs ef-
fectively in order to develop their discussions and
show the relationships between ideas. In general, in
medical writing, a paragraph has three main compo-
nents: a topic sentence, supporting sentences, and a
concluding sentence. The topic sentence is usually
the rst sentence of the paragraph; it states the para-
graph’s central concept or argument. Often, a topic
sentence introduces a new concept and/or transitions
from the previous concept by showing the relation-
ship between the two. Supporting sentences provide
explanations, evidence, and other details related to
the paragraph’s main concept. Paragraphs typical-
ly end with concluding sentences, which provide the
reader with a sense of closure. A concluding sentence
may take many forms, including a brief summary of
the paragraph’s information or a statement about the
implications of that information. However, ending
paragraphs with transitions is usually not effective.
Introducing a new concept in the nal sentence of a
paragraph will likely confuse readers. Instead, this
transition should appear in the topic sentence of the
next paragraph. Of course, this paragraph structure is
not the only possibility; it is simply one common struc-
ture that is effective for most medical writing tasks.
abStract
Taking a methodical approach to constructing paragraphs can improve clarity
and organization in medical writing. This article describes a typical model for paragraph
structure, explains the signicance of coherence and cohesion, and recommends revision
strategies.
Key words: writing, medical writing, medical manuscript, periodicals as topic
87
The Southwest Respiratory and Critical Care Chronicles 2016;4(15)
Kristin Messuri Writing Effective Paragraphs
Paragraph divisions and length are determined
by the concept developed in that paragraph. Writers
may create divisions between paragraphs for a num-
ber of reasons, including to address a new concept, to
compare or contrast information, to introduce a count-
er-argument, or to give readers a chance to process
information before moving on. Although there are no
strict guidelines for paragraph length, each paragraph
should be long enough to fully develop a concept but
not so long that readers become tired, bored, or con-
fused. Writing paragraphs of an effective length is,
then, a matter of being considerate to the audience.2
ParagraPh coherence and coheSion
Both coherence and cohesion are import-
ant qualities of effective paragraphs and texts. These
terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but for
the purposes of this article, coherence refers to the
clarity and comprehensibility of a text or a unit of a
text (such as a paragraph), whereas cohesion refers
to the sentence-level structures and words that foster
this sense of unity. Even when the overall organiza-
tion is predetermined, as in the common “introduc-
tion, methodology, results, and discussion” (IMRAD)
model,3 writers develop coherence by clarifying the
relationships between sections and individual para-
graphs as well as clearly communicating the meaning
of their ideas. In coherent medical writing, paragraphs
are ordered logically; each paragraph has one cen-
tral, well-developed concept; relationships between
ideas are adequately explained; and the language is
appropriate for the audience.
Cohesion fosters coherence through the inclu-
sion of transitions between ideas, as well as effec-
tive sentence structure and word choice. Cohesion is
sometimes called “ow”; it can be described as the
“glue” holding the paragraph together. In a cohesive
paragraph, signal words or transitions will connect
each sentence to the sentences before and after it.
Moreover, key terms will be repeated and used con-
sistently. Note that it is possible for a paragraph to be
cohesive, but not coherent. Ideas may be connected,
but they may use language that is far too technical for
the audience, causing confusion. Or, each sentence
may have effective language, explanations, and tran-
sitions but may fail to adequately develop a central
idea, rendering the paragraph incomprehensible.
concluSion: reviSing ParagraPhS
As with most aspects of writing, paragraphs
are best revised through a careful consideration of
audience. With a specic audience in mind, a writer
should evaluate how the content of each paragraph
develops the central argument of the paper. Try to
view the text from the perspective of a journal reader,
a conference attendee, and so forth. Does each para-
graph provide new information that serves a specic
purpose in the text? Or, do some paragraphs either
provide extraneous information or digress from the
text’s main focus, signs that revisions are necessary?
A writer should ensure that (1) each para-
graph has one central idea and (2) those paragraphs
appear in a logical order in keeping with the organiza-
tional conventions of the genre (such as the IMRAD
model). One method discussed in a past article in
this series is preparing a reverse outline by listing the
central idea of each paragraph.4 This process helps
a writer to determine whether each paragraph does,
indeed, contain only one central idea. If a paragraph
contains multiple concepts, the writer may need to
divide the paragraph or move or delete information.
Once the outline is prepared, the writer can evaluate
whether the paragraphs (represented by their main
ideas) are in a logical order and whether they all sup-
port the main argument of the text. For example, are
the paragraphs in the methods section divided log-
ically? Do they build on one another to explain how
the research was conducted?
Another useful method is writing down the
text’s thesis or central argument followed by the top-
ic sentence of each paragraph. The result is a rough
outline that should progress logically through the
main ideas of the text. If the outline is difcult to un-
derstand, topic sentences may need to be rewritten or
paragraphs may need to be moved, deleted, or other-
wise revised.
Finally, the writer should evaluate each para-
graph for coherence and cohesion by examining the
88 The Southwest Respiratory and Critical Care Chronicles 2016;4(15)
Kristin Messuri Writing Effective Paragraphs
connections between ideas, syntax, and linguistic
choices.
Author Afliations: Kristin Messuri is the Associate Director of
the University Writing Center at Texas Tech University / Texas
Tech University Health Sciences Center in Lubbock, TX
Submitted: 7/1/2016
Published electronically: 7/15/2016
Conict of Interest Disclosures: None
RefeRences
1. Reeves A, Leventhal P. Paragraphing (part 1 of 2). Med Writ
2012; 21 (4): 298-304.
2. Taylor RB. Medical writing: a guide for clinicians, educators,
and researchers. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2012.
3. Sollaci LB, Pereira, MG. The introduction, methods, results,
and discussion (IMRAD) structure: a fty-year survey. J Med
Libr Assoc 2004; 92 (3): 364-371.
4. Messuri K. Revision strategies. Southwest Respir Crit Care
Chron 2016; 4 (14): 46-48.
