“More studies are needed.” If this is your conclusion, you just wasted the most valuable section of your manuscript.

It’s the last thing readers see—yet in 90% of manuscripts I review each year, this is where authors leave their impact to chance.

Here’s why that’s a problem:

• It’s vague. Readers already assume more research is needed.
• It lacks direction. What specific studies should come next?
• It’s uninspiring. A weak closing can make even strong research feel forgettable.

Instead, use these 5 strategies to 10x your conclusion and leave your reader thinking, “This study matters.”

1. Pose New Research Questions

Your study likely opened more doors than it closed. What critical questions now need answering?

✅ Example:

If your study found that high BMI is associated with worse outcomes after myocardial infarction (MI):

↳ “Does weight loss after MI reduce the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events?”

Or, if you identified an unexpected gender difference in treatment outcomes:

↳ “What biological or social factors underlie this gender disparity in treatment response?”

This transforms your conclusion from passive (“we need more research”) to active (“here’s where research should go next”).

Frame your results as the spark for future discoveries.

2. Outline Future Studies with Precision

Your study answered a question—but did it answer all of it? If not, what’s missing?

• A larger cohort?
• A prospective study instead of a cross-sectional one?
• A different analytical approach?

✅ Example:

If your cross-sectional study found a link between sedentary behavior and heart failure:

If your cross-sectional analysis showed a link between sedentary behavior and heart failure:

↳ “A prospective longitudinal study is needed to validate these findings and whether physical activity interventions improve outcomes in high-risk individuals.”

Or, if your cohort primarily consisted of urban patients:

↳ “Larger studies in rural populations are necessary to ensure these findings are broadly applicable.”

Even better? Suggest a specific innovative method:

↳ “Wearable devices could provide real-time data to explore the impact of sedentary behavior on cardiac function.”

Now the reader knows exactly what’s next.

3. Address Generalizability

Your results might not apply to all populations. Make it clear where more work is needed.

✅ Example:

If your hypertension drug trial was conducted in a predominantly white cohort:

“These findings need replication in racially and ethnically diverse populations to ensure equitable treatment outcomes.”

This signals an actionable research gap instead of a generic call for “more studies.”

4. Highlight Validation & Replication Needs

Certain studies—especially prediction models, genetic studies, and translational research—require external validation. State that explicitly.

✅ Example:

If you developed a CVD risk calculator:

↳ “External validation in an independent cohort is critical to ensure its utility across different healthcare systems.”

OR if your study identified a new biomarker for diagnosing heart failure:

↳ “Replication in larger, diverse cohorts is needed to confirm its diagnostic accuracy and clinical usefulness.”

This tells readers that the next step isn’t just another study—it’s validation for real-world use.

It builds trust in your findings and their potential impact.

5. Discuss Clinical & Policy Implications

The best conclusions don’t just summarize results. They tell readers why those results matter.

✅ Example:

If your study found that early use of SGLT2 inhibitors in diabetes patients reduced CVD events:

↳ “These findings support revising clinical guidelines to prioritize SGLT2 inhibitors for diabetes patients at high cardiovascular risk.”

OR if you showed that lifestyle interventions reduce obesity-related hypertension in underserved populations:

↳ “These results highlight the need for policies that expand access to lifestyle intervention programs in low-resource communities.”

This shifts the focus from what was studied to what should change because of it.

Spell it out. Don’t leave it up to the audience to connect the dots.

BONUS: Stop Undermining Your Own Conclusion

Many authors make the mistake of ending with a limitation, unintentionally weakening their impact.

❌ Weak:

“Our data support the safety of this drug in rheumatoid arthritis patients, however, more research is needed to confirm long-term safety.”

This order dilutes the strength of your conclusion. Readers remember endings—so don’t let limitations take center stage.

✅ Stronger:

“While long-term safety requires further study, our findings support the use of this drug in rheumatoid arthritis patients with cardiovascular disease.”

Same message. Different impact. The last thing your reader sees is why your research matters.

The Takeaway

One study. Two drafts.

One ends with “More studies are needed.”

The other ends with a sharp, clear, and compelling conclusion.

Which one sticks with the reader?

Your conclusion is your final chance to make an impression. Make it count.

👉 Which of these 5 strategies will you use in your next manuscript?