Literature DB >> 17045153

Structured abstracts: do they improve the quality of information in abstracts?

Sandeep Sharma1, Jayne E Harrison.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This retrospective observational study was designed to assess the impact on quality of changing from unstructured to structured abstract format. Six dental journals, 3 that adopted structured abstracts and 3 with unstructured abstracts, were used.
METHODS: One hundred abstracts from original articles, published between January 1995 and December 1998, were selected from each journal. A 29-question checklist was developed and used to assess the quality of the information in the abstracts.
RESULTS: The mean score for abstracts published in all journal was 53.9% (SD 11.5; 95% CI 52.8%, 54.8%). There was no statistically significant difference between the scores of the first 50 abstracts and the second 50 abstracts from any journals with unstructured abstracts (P = .19-.80). The mean score of the second 50 abstracts from journals that adopted the structured abstract format was significantly higher than scores from journals with unchanged formats (P < or =.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Structured abstracts provide higher-quality information. Journal editors should be encouraged to use a structured abstract format.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17045153     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.10.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  11 in total

1.  Discrepancies between Abstracts Presented at International Association for Dental Research Annual Sessions from 2004 to 2005 and Full-Text Publication.

Authors:  Soni Prasad; Damian J Lee; Judy Chia-Chun Yuan; Valentim A R Barao; Nodesh Shyamsunder; Cortino Sukotjo
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2012-02-22

2.  Structure formats of randomised controlled trial abstracts: a cross-sectional analysis of their current usage and association with methodology reporting.

Authors:  Fang Hua; Tanya Walsh; Anne-Marie Glenny; Helen Worthington
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 3.  A scoping review of comparisons between abstracts and full reports in primary biomedical research.

Authors:  Guowei Li; Luciana P F Abbade; Ikunna Nwosu; Yanling Jin; Alvin Leenus; Muhammad Maaz; Mei Wang; Meha Bhatt; Laura Zielinski; Nitika Sanger; Bianca Bantoto; Candice Luo; Ieta Shams; Hamnah Shahid; Yaping Chang; Guangwen Sun; Lawrence Mbuagbaw; Zainab Samaan; Mitchell A H Levine; Jonathan D Adachi; Lehana Thabane
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2017-12-29       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  There is still room for improvement in the completeness of abstract reporting according to the PRISMA-A checklist: a cross-sectional study on systematic reviews in periodontology.

Authors:  Milagros Adobes Martin; Sala Santamans Faustino; Inmaculada Llario Almiñana; Riccardo Aiuto; Roberto Rotundo; Daniele Garcovich
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 4.615

5.  Evaluation of reporting quality of abstracts of randomized controlled trials regarding patients with COVID-19 using the CONSORT statement for abstracts.

Authors:  Yuhuan Yin; Jiangxia Gao; Yiyin Zhang; Xiaoli Zhang; Jianying Ye; Juxia Zhang
Journal:  Int J Infect Dis       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 12.074

6.  A comprehensive quality analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials of Asian ginseng and American ginseng based on the CONSORT guideline.

Authors:  Weijie Chen; Xiuzhu Li; Zhejie Chen; Wei Hao; Peifen Yao; Meng Li; Kunmeng Liu; Hao Hu; Shengpeng Wang; Yitao Wang
Journal:  J Ginseng Res       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 6.060

Review 7.  Theoretical report: reflections and considerations for authors, reviewers, and editors.

Authors:  Breno Augusto Bormann de Souza Filho; Érika Fernandes Tritany; Cláudio José Struchiner
Journal:  Rev Saude Publica       Date:  2022-04-22       Impact factor: 2.772

8.  Assessing reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts in psychiatry: Adherence to CONSORT for abstracts: A systematic review.

Authors:  Seung Yeon Song; Boyeon Kim; Inhye Kim; Sungeun Kim; Minjeong Kwon; Changsu Han; Eunyoung Kim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Quality of abstracts of pilot trials in heart failure: A protocol for a systematic survey.

Authors:  Godsent Isiguzo; Moleen Zunza; Maxwell Chirehwa; Bongani M Mayosi; Lehana Thabane
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2017-11-07

Review 10.  The reporting quality of abstracts of stepped wedge randomized trials is suboptimal: A systematic survey of the literature.

Authors:  Mei Wang; Yanling Jin; Zheng Jing Hu; Alex Thabane; Brittany Dennis; Olga Gajic-Veljanoski; James Paul; Lehana Thabane
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2017-08-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.