‫תקצור‬
Kostoff:
Structured abstracts are more useful for journal users. Most medical journal require
structured abstracts – it would be good in technical journals also. There is a lack of
uniformity in the way information is presented, amount of information given, types of
information given, and clarity.
Readers want to know: Why this research is important (Background), purpose of
research (objectives), techniques used (method), what new info was given (results)
and conclusions drawn. These are all mandatory categories.
Some groups of ppl want other info like potential uses, more readable versions, or
comments and signifigance of research.
Structured abstracts are longer, but do not stunt the creativity. Information is more
useable.
Also its important that each category give the same type of info – sometimes a
different view of the information is seen from each group, and it should all give the
same impression.
Common complaints are about space and budget. Cost effectiveness needs to be taken
into account, and anyway most journals have space if they can find it. The more
useful their info is, the more its worth printing, and the more ppl will read it, etc.
ARTICLE GIVES EXAMPLES OF STRUCTURED ABSTRACTS AT END.
Hartley – Are structured abstracts more accurate?
Recent studies have shown that almost 40% of structured abstracts studies have
inaccuracies. Because they have more information they have more room for error.
Study done to find out if this was true: looked for differences in the data given in the
abstract and in the article, statements found in the abstract that could not be justified
by the article, or conclusions drawn in the abstract that couldn’t be proved by the
abstract.
In 30 pairs of abstracts (one structured one traditional) 1 data inconsistency was
found- and more likely a mistake in the article not the abstract. No info was found in
the abstract that wasn’t found in the article. All conclusions made could be justified
by the abstracts but generally there was “selective reporting” resulting in unjustified
conclusions. Info that would be necc to prove the point wasn’t given, although it was
present in the article.
There weren’t much difference between the structured and the non-structured
abstracts, if anything the structured ones were more accurate and informative. This
was possibly because they were written by the same people who wrote the traditional
abstracts, just revised them.
This contradicts previous studies- why? Previous studies called “selective reporting”
inaccurate, while it wasn’t in this study. Different types of abstracts also – previous
abstracts studied had more data in the results section – those studied here were from
psychological journals and did not present many results. Also those studied before
were part of larger journals; perhaps the editors were less careful than the smaller
journals were. Problems with this study are there weren’t many examples to study –
now that it is more prevalent, there can be better studies.
Hartley – Do structured abstracts take up more space?
Structured abstracts have more information and are easier to use and search. Its
divided into nice sections, information is in order, and nothing important is left out.
Problem is they take up more space. Average amount of more space needed is 21%
although ranges from 12-47. Problem is easily solved when a journal starts all new
articles on a new right hand page – there is usually a blank left page. Medium or small
sized journals who did this had a harder time fitting it in, but wasn’t usually a
problem. When a journal just started on a new page, there was still usually room at the
bottom of the page of the last article. One in 10 of these journals had a problem.
When articles just run on one right after the other, there is the biggest problems,
especially in the smaller sized journals. This style is rare though in scientific journals.
But space can be saved in other places also – space is wasted with the authors name
and address, margins, indentations, etc. Sometimes space was saved by putting the
abstract in a smaller font, but this made it hard to read. Also different methods of
citation were used, but this was also inconvenient (such as having to flip to the back
of the article). Extra spaces were put between sections etc – it depends on what the
journals priorities are.
Cleveland – Types of Abstracts
Abstracts are written to decrease time end effort needed to search output from
research and scholarship. User doesn’t want to read everything, and sometimes the
abstract will actually have everything the user needs. They are scanable.
Indexes deal with location but do not judge info. Quality filtering is a question –
abstracts seem like the place to do that, but would take much more quality evaluation.
Possibly the traditional bland abstracts need t be rethought. Users want a strong
professional opinion on the validity of this info.
There are different types of abstracts although abstracters usually tend to write a
combination of them. Type of material and users are the basis for decision.
Indicative abstracts/descriptive
Tell us that there is significant and specific data to be found here. Shorter, more
general; doesn’t give the user a progressive account of the paper. Never expected to
replace the paper, only essential info such as its purpose and results.
Informative
Actually presents the specific data. Tries to present as much quantitative and
qualitative data as possible. Most useful for abstracts on experiments. Should include:
objective and scope of the work, methods used, results, conclusions. Most popular and
important abstract.
Critical abstracts
Makes a value judgment or comment. Careful, because if its very editorial its really a
review and not an abstract, doesn’t truly represent document content. People don’t
like it because it’s hard enough to keep bias out – why bring it in? Abstracter must be
knowledgeable about subject and methodologies.
Classifying abstracts by use:
Discipline oriented: written for a specific area of knowledge
Mission oriented- to support activities that may or may not be interdisciplinary
Slanted – form of a mission oriented abstract that highlights on a selected portion of
the documents content
Classifying abstracts by author
Ideal abstracter would be an author of the paper who is an expert in the subject and
also an experienced abstracter.
Authors aren’t necc. Good abstracters. Their abstracts are on time, less expensive. But
not usually good abstracters. They are too close to the paper to be objective about
what is important. Also known to use the abstracts to promote the paper.
Subject specialists can be trained to write abstracts and then usually write very good
ones. The specialists represent the establishment of the subject and might be reluctant
to write an abstract for a paper whose thesis is offbeat and new ideas. Could be a
professional opponent – clash of interests.
Full time professional abstracters demand higher wages, but do it on time, have
foreign languages, can cover areas where subject experts cant be found. Its easier to
train a subject specialist in abstracting than it is to train an abstracter in a subject.
Structured abstracts
Concern is with inaccuracy in abstracts. Structured abstracts help with this –
necessary parts: Background, Aim, Method, Results, Conclusions.
Abstracts have more pertinent info, higher quality, and good for peer review.
The abstract must be a priority choice for info seekers, which is right now not necc
the case.
cleveland: purpose of an abstract:
To give scholars filtered access to literature in their respective subjects allows them to
scan latest issues as well as retrospectives study. Indexers and abstracters can't
possibly know everything that a user might need - therefore must index and abstract
everything? Not true because bibliographic control means just that - it implies that
info professionals can make decisions like this.
An abstracter probably has guidelines of what needs to go in and what doesn’t. there
are economic constraints, publishers might only want SIGNIFIGANT material.
Abstracters filter through publishers - a publisher’s reputation will affect whether the
article gets abstracted or not. The abstracter needs to understand the users well to
know what they will need.
Steps in abstracting:
1. Record the reference - all abstracts need full bibliography- assumed that any
abstract will need the article also.
Title - if the abstracter thinks it needs reworking, he can redo the title but as little
as possible.
Author - users often base searches on authors, and citations are easier to find by
authors. Better not to use initials.
Author affiliation - helps the user evaluate the document, also helps if he wants to
contact the organization, get reprints of the article, etc
Funding agency - must acknowledge funding and support.
Publication source - most important -tells where the article is - must include
journal title, volume and issue numbers, pages, and year. Also patents must
include title, inventor, organization, country, patent number, issue date.
Language - even if it has been translated, the original language should be noted,
also if the paper is not available in translation. Sometimes the title is translated;
sometimes it’s left in the original form also.
2. Identify key concepts, and create a word list that will describe the documents
content. review all the points in the document and decide which ones are
important to include = content analysis:
Objectives and scope = why was it written? usually discussed at the beginning.
Method - some of the method should be described but not all. If its not an
experiment, not data sources and how the data was handled, especially any
statistical techniques.
Results - what was the outcome? what factors affect validity, reliability, or
accuracy?
Conclusions - why hypothesis were rejected or accepted?
Other info- supportive info should be noted, even if they are not directly related
but might be important for other fields. If the purpose of the abstract is clear, it
will be clear what topics and parts can be ignored. General introductions and
history that is general knowledge can be ignored, as well as info the reader would
be expected to know. Graphics can be ignored unless they add something new to
the reading.
3. Write the annotation - use an outline. an abstract should not have one extra
word in it. Over 500 words, it’s a review. Don’t repeat ideas mentioned in the
title. Complete basic info content needs to be there, but not every detail. It will
not be as complete as the original. Take notes from the document, rather than
lift sentences straight out of it. Be careful only to use abbreviations that are
known to everyone. Also don’t take sides - don’t present your opinions, even
in a critical abstract. The author’s bias can be mentioned. Make points such as
validity, accuracy, relationships with different viewpoints.
4. put the abstracters name or initials at the bottom
5. Arrangement of the abstracts - alphabetical by title? Or author, or subject,
dictionary, and classified. It will need indexes to support it. Editing an abstract
- the editor is basically a master abstracter, taking out un-needed words,
analyses content and quality. Check the references. Make sure standard terms
are used as well as rules. Must be careful that it doesn’t omit important things.
He also separates the different parts of the abstract, getting it ready for
publication. He writes guides to the use of the abstract. Evaluating an abstractif it is so good that no one can afford it, it’s useless. Main point is how well it
satisfies the user.