Stating main conclusions up top and then adding supporting logic is definitely one tried-and-true approach. A variation would be to state the most interesting stuff, and support and expand upon that lower down, arriving at a conclusion at the end. I purposely didn’t delve into exactly what should be up high vs. lower down because it depends on so many factors, including whether a story is news vs. feature, how long it is, how many angles and sources, and so forth. The bottom line, imo, is the first three graphs need to be engaging, they need to impart useful information, and they shouldn’t test readers’ patience. I hesitate to every suggest anyone should try to construct a story based on a firm set of rules. If it were that easy, we’d all be great writers, and we’re not. So much of this is art, not science.