Writing For Biotech Industry

How I taught my PhD student to turn boring abstracts into reader magnets. His transformation shocked the entire department. Mark came to me frustrated. Brilliant research on sustainable products. But his abstracts were putting reviewers to sleep. Conference rejections piling up. "People skip my abstracts completely," he said. "Even my peers falls asleep reading them." I showed him the 6-step magnet formula. One weekend later, everything changed. The Abstract Magnet Framework: 1. Why It Matters - Hook readers with real-world significance - Make them care from sentence one 2. What's Missing - Identify the research gap clearly - Show why your work is needed 3. Goals - Crystal clear objectives and hypothesis - No confusion about your aims 4. How You Did It - Brief methodology for credibility - Prove your approach is solid 5. Discoveries - Spotlight your key results - The treasure you unearthed 6. So What? - Impact and implications - How you're changing the game Mark rewrote his abstract using this formula. Submitted to three conferences. Accepted by all three. Same research. Different presentation strategy. Irresistible results. The secret: Every word must earn its place in 200 words. Make readers hungry for more. Which step do you struggle with most in abstract writing? Follow me for more research communication strategies that actually work.

Ph.D. scholars and researchers, are your research papers structured to make an impact? Before submitting, consider: 🔍 Does each section serve its purpose? 🧭 Is your work discoverable, readable, and relevant? 📊 Can others replicate and build on your findings? Let's explore a breakdown of each core section in a research paper covering the what, why, and how. You can use this framework to refine your draft or build a stronger manuscript from scratch. 🔷 1. Title - Your first impression on readers and databases. - Be clear, keyword-rich, and avoid jargon. Stay within 12–15 words. 🔷 2. Abstract - A 150–250 word summary: background, aim, methods, results, conclusion. - Write it last, place it first. Ensure it offers quick relevance to readers. 🔷 3. Keywords - Improve discoverability with 4–6 well-chosen terms beyond the title. - Reflect your study's domain, methods, or variables. 🔷 4. Introduction - Set the stage: context, problem, literature gap, research question. - Start broad, narrow to the objective or hypothesis. 🔷 5. Methods - Detail your approach to ensure reproducibility. - Include design, sampling, tools, and data analysis. 🔷 6. Results - Report findings factually using text, tables, and visuals. - Focus on trends, data patterns, and measurable outcomes. 🔷 7. Discussion - Interpret results, compare them with literature, note limitations, and suggest next steps. - Show the significance of your findings in the broader field. 🔷 8. Conclusion - Summarize your main findings and their implications. -Restate objectives, contributions, and future directions. 🔷 9. References - Back your work with accurate, properly formatted citations. - Match all in-text references with a complete list. 🔷 10. Figures and Tables - Use visuals to enhance clarity and engagement. - Label, make them self-contained, and reference them in the text. 🔷 11. Acknowledgements (Optional) - Recognize non-author contributions. - Promote transparency and academic courtesy. 🔷 12. Author Contributions (Optional) - Define specific author roles using a contributor taxonomy. - Enhances accountability and clarity. 🔷 13. Conflict of Interest / Funding Disclosure - Declare financial support and potential biases. - Uphold transparency and ethical standards. 🎁 Bonus takeaway: Tools like AnswerThis can streamline your literature review and help in your first draft, saving time and improving accuracy. 💬 Comment: Which section is most challenging to write: abstract, methods, or discussion? Let's share our tips and support each other's writing journey 👇 #ResearchMadeEasy #LiteratureReview #PaperPublication #Research #AnswerThis

The first time I tried to explain my PhD project to my family… (spoiler: it didn’t go well) I started confidently: “It’s about transcription factors regulating epithelial cancer and differentiation…” 🤷♂️ Two sentences in, I saw blank stares. By the third sentence, someone had already switched the topic to a more approachable soccer game. 💭 That’s when I realized: if I couldn’t explain my research to the people closest to me, how could I ever convince reviewers, collaborators, or funders that it mattered? Since then, I’ve practiced breaking complex science into simple, human language: - Using analogies and mataphors (e.g., “transcription factors are like recruiters that are calling for other factors on the genes"). - Cutting jargon (no one outside the lab really would say “epigenetic remodeling” as a phrase). - Focusing on the why before the how. 💡Lesson: Communication is not “dumbing down” science. It's the opposite indeed. It’s making sure your work can travel outside the lab, to policymakers, patients, and yes, even family dinners. Becuase if it's true we are responsable for what we say, we're also responsable for what the other will understand. 👉 Curious: How do you explain your research to non-scientists without losing them in 5 seconds? -- #PhDLife #PostdocLife #ResearchLife #ScienceCommunication #Bioinformatics

You've engineered bacteria to eat plastic. However, investors just funded a crypto project run by 22-year-olds. You've solved protein folding. VCs are investing in another meal kit startup. You've developed a biomarker that detects Alzheimer's 10 years early. The unicorn this week? An app that reminds you to drink water. This pill is hard to swallow: The bitter truth in biotech: brilliant science rarely attracts funding on its own merit. In other words, the most funded projects aren't necessarily the most scientifically groundbreaking; they're the ones that effectively communicate their value. I've been there. Standing in front of senior management, hands shaking, knowing this one pitch would determine if years of research lived or died. We won first place. Everything changed. Here's what nobody tells you: most brilliant scientists can't pitch. Not because they're not smart enough, but because nobody taught them how to translate genius into dollars. The challenges are always the same: - Making complex science simple without dumbing it down - Competing for attention spans shorter than a TikTok video - Turning "interesting research" into "must-have investment" - Overcoming the dreaded "too risky" death sentence Since that pivotal moment, I've made it my mission to help scientists get the funding they deserve. I've spoken at prestigious conferences, hosted the Smart Biotech Scientist podcast, and worked with dozens of researchers who've gone from rejected to funded. The pattern is always identical: brilliant science + compelling story = investment. Most scientists skip the second part. Here's how to fix it: 1. Start with the problem, not the solution. "Diabetes costs families $300K per patient" hits harder than "We developed a novel biomarker." 2. Use the 10-second rule. If you can't explain your breakthrough in 10 seconds, you don't understand it well enough to pitch it. 3. Show, don't tell. One patient story beats a hundred statistical analyses. 4. Address the elephant early. Every investor is thinking "too risky." Acknowledge it, then crush it with data. 5. Lead with market size, not technology specs. "This affects 50 million patients" gets attention before "Our proprietary algorithm uses machine learning.” The best pitches don't ask for money, but they make investors afraid of missing out. What's your biggest pitching challenge? #Biotech #ScienceCommunication #Fundraising #Innovation #Pitching

Under the microscope, tissues and cells look complex and beautiful. But without context, their story can be hard to follow, much like the science behind them. That’s why I’m so passionate about accessible science communication. In biotech and life sciences, breakthroughs like gene editing and cell therapies are extraordinary. But if they’re hidden behind technical language, we miss the chance to inspire, build trust, and show their real-world impact. At Thermo Fisher Scientific, I’ve seen how storytelling can unlock that understanding. We tell stories about the researchers, patients and innovators behind science to bring discoveries to life, use formats like podcasting to make complex topics approachable to spark curiosity beyond the lab, and social media to turn small scientific details into moments of wonder for a broad audience. The communicator’s role is to help people see both the beauty and the meaning behind the work so that people can feel connected to it. The most successful science communicators are shifting their focus from complexity to clarity. 💡 They translate research into stories that resonate with non-scientists. 💡 They highlight the why behind innovation, not just the how. 💡 They use plain language without sacrificing scientific accuracy. When we make science more accessible, we don’t dilute it. We amplify it. And in doing so, we bring more people into the conversation, which is where real impact begins.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) published its initial draft of "Mapping Relationships Between Documentary Standards, Regulations, Frameworks, and Guidelines: Developing Cybersecurity and Privacy Concept Mappings (IR 8477)," open for public comment until Oct 26, 2023. This document describes #NIST's approach for identifying and documenting the relationships between concepts such as #controls, requirements, recommendations, outcomes, #technologies, functions, processes, techniques, roles, and skills. By following this approach and establishing a single concept system that links #cybersecurity and #privacy concepts from many sources into a cohesive and consistent set of relationship mappings within the NIST Cybersecurity and Privacy Reference Tool (#CPRT), companies could answer difficult and time consuming questions like: • How does conforming to one standard help the organization conform to another standard? • What parts of the second standard does the first standard fail to address? • Where can we find more information on how to satisfy a particular requirement in a guideline? • What types of technologies can we use, and what types of skills do the implementers need to have? • If we want to conform to a particular standard, what types of #cyber capabilities do our technology product and service providers need to support? • If we perform a particular #security assessment methodology, what requirements will be sufficiently validated across our #compliance portfolio? • What recommendations substantially changed from a guideline’s previous version to its current version? • What privacy and #securitycontrols must be in place before we adopt a new technology? This proposed approach to cybersecurity and privacy concept mapping aims to guide companies in understanding how the elements of diverse cybersecurity and privacy #standards, regulations, #frameworks, guidelines, and other content are related to each other.

Communicating complex data insights to stakeholders who may not have a technical background is crucial for the success of any data science project. Here are some personal tips that I've learned over the years while working in consulting: 1. Know Your Audience: Understand who your audience is and what they care about. Tailor your presentation to address their specific concerns and interests. Use language and examples that are relevant and easily understandable to them. 2. Simplify the Message: Distill your findings into clear, concise messages. Avoid jargon and technical terms that may confuse your audience. Focus on the key insights and their implications rather than the intricate details of your analysis. 3. Use Visuals Wisely: Leverage charts, graphs, and infographics to convey your data visually. Visuals can help illustrate trends and patterns more effectively than numbers alone. Ensure your visuals are simple, clean, and directly support your key points. 4. Tell a Story: Frame your data within a narrative that guides your audience through the insights. Start with the problem, present your analysis, and conclude with actionable recommendations. Storytelling helps make the data more relatable and memorable. 5. Highlight the Impact: Explain the real-world impact of your findings. How do they affect the business or the problem at hand? Stakeholders are more likely to engage with your presentation if they understand the tangible benefits of your insights. 6. Practice Active Listening: Encourage questions and feedback from your audience. Listen actively and be prepared to explain or reframe your points as needed. This shows respect for their perspective and helps ensure they fully grasp your message. Share your tips or experiences in presenting data science projects in the comments below! Let’s learn from each other. 🌟 #DataScience #PresentationSkills #EffectiveCommunication #TechToNonTech #StakeholderEngagement #DataVisualization

Having great data is table stakes. But great data means nothing if stakeholders can't easily grasp your progress. Clear comms separate funded/partnered biotechs from those still pitching. In biotech, compelling data is a precursor to getting deals done. But it’s still humans at the heart of those deals. Securing financing or pharma partnerships ultimately comes down to humans making decisions…and humans need clarity, not complexity. The key is leading with the high-level view. Before diving into detailed analyses, show stakeholders the "red, yellow, green" status across your pipeline. Let them see where you stand, then allow them to drill into the specific data points that matter for their decision. What we hear from our partners at Kaleidoscope is that taking this approach serves two critical functions: it gives decision-makers confidence in the big picture, and it provides the team with a clear framework to communicate wins and address challenges. The goal of data should be to drive alignment and informed decision-making, without overwhelming everyone with information they can't process.

𝗘𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗲𝗹𝘁 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗵𝘄𝗮𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝗯𝗶𝘁 𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘂𝗼𝘂𝘀? If so, you're not alone. When it comes to bringing a medical device to market, the journey can feel anything but straightforward. Here are some actionable steps to make your regulatory path less tenuous and more secure: 𝗨𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗟𝗮𝗻𝗱𝘀𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗲 → Different regions have different requirements. → For instance, the FDA in the U.S. and the MHRA in the UK have unique criteria. → Knowing the specifics can save you from surprises later on. 𝗗𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝘀 𝗞𝗲𝘆 → Maintain thorough and organised documentation. → This includes everything from design history files to risk management reports. → Trust me, when an auditor/inspector comes knocking, you'll be thankful for your meticulous records. 𝗞𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗖𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 → Misclassifying your device can lead to major setbacks. → Ensure you understand whether your device falls under Class I, II, or III. → This will dictate the level of regulatory scrutiny your product will face. 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗘𝗮𝗿𝗹𝘆 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗥𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗕𝗼𝗱𝗶𝗲𝘀 → Don't wait until the last minute to interact with regulatory authorities. → Early engagement can provide critical insights and help you avoid common pitfalls. → For example, presubmission meetings with the FDA can be invaluable. 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘆 𝗨𝗽𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻 𝗥𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 → Regulatory standards are constantly evolving. → Subscribe to industry newsletters and join relevant forums. → Being proactive can often mean the difference between compliance and costly delays. 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗤𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗦𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺𝘀 (𝗤𝗠𝗦) → A robust QMS is not just a regulatory requirement; it’s a business asset. → Implementing standards like ISO 13485 can streamline your processes and improve product quality. 𝗛𝗶𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗿 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘁𝘀 → Don’t hesitate to bring in external expertise. → Regulatory consultants can provide specialised knowledge and help navigate complex requirements. → This can be particularly useful for SMEs with limited in-house resources. Conduct Thorough Testing and Validation → Ensure that all necessary tests are conducted and well documented. → This includes biocompatibility, electrical safety, and performance testing. → Proper validation can prevent last minute hitches during the approval process. Plan for PostMarket Surveillance → Regulatory compliance doesn’t end at market entry. Remember, the regulatory journey might seem tenuous, but with the right approach, you can navigate it successfully.

This is how I advise my #students to write research manuscripts. General points: 1. Research questions addressed by your manuscript are key and should guide you. 2. Don’t view your manuscript as an article. See it as a STORY. 3. Pick the writing style that is easily understood by a broader community. Make reading easy. 4. Most of data should get into the paper. If some doesn’t support the hypothesis, it still must be in the Suppl. Information. It must show the reproducibility limits. 5. Make the paper shorter, not longer. Cut out things that may sound like ‘bluff’ or ‘decoration’ of the story. Use well-defined terminology, don’t invent it unless clearly necessary. 6. Focus on reporting & explaining the numbers. Minimize discussions of qualitative outcomes and your imagination. Specific steps: 1️⃣ First, formulate and polish the key questions that your study addresses. It may take hours or even days (even though you've been doing research in this area for years). A single study should address no more than 1-3 key questions. It’s your perfect start for writing. 2️⃣ Write down the structure of your STORY first: Sections and Subsections that will answer those questions. Into each subsection, put 1-2 sentences that formulate the message(s) from this subsection. It will hugely help you navigate the manuscript later and save a lot of time. 3️⃣ Write approximate messages in the conclusion section. Usually, no more than 1-4 sentences. At this point, SHARE your structure+questions+messages document with your advisor for feedback. Toss it back and forth until you both converge. You can also include major collaborators if needed. 4️⃣ Write the introduction part. Put down the paragraphs that introduce a reader into the key question(s) of the manuscript and the background of your story. 5️⃣ Write the main text for each section, smoothly and firmly. Each paragraph should add a separate value and end with a message-like sentence. Follow the “First… Second… Third…” structure for paragraphs when possible, it gives rigor and readability to your story. 6️⃣ Write the conclusions. Add a broader perspective that is justified and not generic. 7️⃣ Write the abstract. It must have simple terminology and clearly explain what readers can find inside the paper. It also should contain the key conclusions. 8️⃣ Write up 4-5 different titles and spend >30 mins with your team discussing which title sounds best. Finally, iterate on the resulting draft within your team. The number of drafts can easily exceed 20. ❗In addition, I always emphasize that a high quality of your research paper: - sharpen your writing and analytical skills. - shapes your reputation. - shows who you are as a researcher and communicator. p.s. Everyone has a different style of advising and writing. You can adopt only some specific steps if you find them helpful. #PhD #science #engineering #chemistry #chemicalengineering #university #lifesciences