1) first paragraph: general backgroundâWhat do we know about the topic? What does this study add to what we know (whatâs new here)? What is the hypothesis or research question?
2) second paragraph: describe their methodologyâwho are the participants and what did they do in the study? NOTE: if the article you selected does not have a Method section, then youâre summarizing the wrong kind of article.
3) third paragraph: what did the authors find? Describe this in general terms â thereâs no need to report their means, F-ratios, and so forth, but be sure to address all the key findings.
4) fourth paragraph: What do these results mean? Do they support the hypothesis? If so, how? If not, why? What are the shortcomings of the present study? Do their findings suggest possibilities for future research?
Sample Solution
Although costs have increased, the development of new drugs has seen a decline since the 1990s (True cost). The process of pharmaceutical development is long, costly, and uncertain. According to the Food and Drug Administration, the average cost of developing a new drug is $2.6 billion dollars (FDA). Approximately 50% of developed medications reach screening while a low 5% of medications are approved (FDA). With these risks, pharmaceutical companies have fixated on the promotion of their current drugs as opposed to the release of new medications. However, pharmaceutical companies have long justified their pricing by defensively arguing that revenue goes towards the research and development of new medication. In a six year review (2011-2017) of thirteen of the large pharmaceutical companies, 17% of total revenue was spent on research and development with a staggering 60% spent on the marketing of their current products (True). Over the years, pharmaceutical companies have been able to allocate their profits towards their gains. After all, the pharmaceutical industry is a lucrative business that have thrived under the laxity of regulations and have figured out ways to further increase profit margins. As these problems have become more apparent, bills such as Californiaâs drug transparency bill of 2017 have been enacted. This bill mandates these companies to provide 60 day warnings of greater than or equal to 16% price increases (Upenn). Although the idea behind this bill is a step towards better regulations, it has yet to be adapted on a national level. As mentioned previously, the Food and Drug Administration is the sector that awards market exclusivity while the US Patent and Trademark Office is responsible for patent exclus>
Although costs have increased, the development of new drugs has seen a decline since the 1990s (True cost). The process of pharmaceutical development is long, costly, and uncertain. According to the Food and Drug Administration, the average cost of developing a new drug is $2.6 billion dollars (FDA). Approximately 50% of developed medications reach screening while a low 5% of medications are approved (FDA). With these risks, pharmaceutical companies have fixated on the promotion of their current drugs as opposed to the release of new medications. However, pharmaceutical companies have long justified their pricing by defensively arguing that revenue goes towards the research and development of new medication. In a six year review (2011-2017) of thirteen of the large pharmaceutical companies, 17% of total revenue was spent on research and development with a staggering 60% spent on the marketing of their current products (True). Over the years, pharmaceutical companies have been able to allocate their profits towards their gains. After all, the pharmaceutical industry is a lucrative business that have thrived under the laxity of regulations and have figured out ways to further increase profit margins. As these problems have become more apparent, bills such as Californiaâs drug transparency bill of 2017 have been enacted. This bill mandates these companies to provide 60 day warnings of greater than or equal to 16% price increases (Upenn). Although the idea behind this bill is a step towards better regulations, it has yet to be adapted on a national level. As mentioned previously, the Food and Drug Administration is the sector that awards market exclusivity while the US Patent and Trademark Office is responsible for patent exclus>
