Can the accuracy of abstracts be improved by providing specific instructions? A randomized controlled trial

JAMA

Volumn 280, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 267-269

  Pitkin, Roy M ^a   Branagan, Mary Ann ^a,b  

^a Obstetrics and Gynecology   (United States)

^b Office of CHEST   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; DATA ANALYSIS; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZATION;

EID: 0032527563     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.280.3.267     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Pitkin RM. The importance of the abstract. Obstet Gynecol. 1987;70:267.
2. Narine L, Yee DS, Einarson TR, Ilersich AL. Quality of abstracts of original research articles in CMAJ in 1989. Can Med Assoc J. 1991;144:449-453.
3. Roberts JC, Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW. Effects of peer review and editing on the readability of articles published in Annals of Internal Medicine. JAMA. 1994;272:119-121.
4. Goodman SN, Berlin J, Fletcher SW, Fletcher RH. Manuscript quality before and after peer review and editing at Annals of Internal Medicine. Ann Intern Med. 1994;121:11-21.
5. Ad Hoc Working Group for Critical Appraisal of the Medical Literature. A proposal for more informative abstracts of clinical articles. Ann Intern Med. 1987;106:598-604.
6. Taddio A, Pain T, Fassos FF, Boon H, Ilersich AL, Einarson TR. Quality of unstructured and structured abstracts of original research articles in the British Medical Journal, the Canadian Medical Association Journal, and the Journal of the American Medical Association. Can Med Assoc J. 1994;150:1611-1615.
7. Hartley J, Benjamin M. An evaluation of structured abstracts in journals published by the British Psychological Society. Br J Educ Psychol. In press.