Comment: Should review articles also follow structured abstract guidelines? A strong argument can be made that yes, they should. This abstract of a review article tells us almost nothing. They give some background, then vaguely state what they present in their manuscript. Thus, the abstract in effect tells the reader to just read the manuscript. What good is that? Are abstracts simply commercials, urging readers to read the full manuscript? No. Abstracts should provide a summary of the contents of the manuscript. To make it easy for readers to get the gist of the manuscript, the full article, the abstract should ideally contain these sections: a) background, b) methods, c) results, d) conclusion, and optionally e) implications. These sections should be clearly identifiable. Typically, each section should start on a new line, with the section title in all caps or bold type. Heart Fail Rev. 2016 Sep 26; (retrieved Sep, 2016).
There are currently 1090 pearls in the database. While every attempt has been made to ensure accuracy, mistakes can and do occur. Use databank at your own risk.
All pearls © 2024 by the Internet Medical Association. Click Here to view more medical pearls.
home | refresh
Medical Pearls from the Internet Medical Association