Enhancing practitioner knowledge through a unique abstracting format used with research on social work practice journal articles

Research on Social Work Practice

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 234-238

  Holosko, Michael J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Practitioner knowledge abstract

Indexed keywords

EID: 59549096445     PISSN: 10497315     EISSN: 15527581     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1049731508320194     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Ad Hoc Working Group for Critical Appraisal of the Medical Literature. (1987). A proposal for more informative abstracts of clinical articles. Annals of Internal Medicine, 106, 598-604.
2. American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5 th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
3. Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T.N. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Hartley, J. (1999). Applying ergonomics to applied ergonomics. Applied Ergonomics, 30, 535-541.
5. Hartley, J. (2002). Do structured abstracts take up more space? And does it matter ? Journal of Information Science, 28, 437-442.
6. Hartley, J. (2003). Improving the clarity of journal abstracts in psychology: The case for structure. Science Communication, 24, 366-379.
7. Hartley, J., & Benjamin, M. (1998). An evaluation of structured abstracts in journals published by the British Psychological Society. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 448-456.
8. Hartley, J., & Sydes, M. (1997). Are structured abstracts easier to read than traditional ones ? Journal of Research in Reading, 20, 122-136.
9. Hartley, J., Sydes, M., & Blurton, A. (1996). Obtaining information accurately and quickly: Are structured abstracts more efficient ? Journal of Information Science, 22, 349-356.
10. Haynes, R.B., Mulrow, C.D., Huth, E.J., Altman, D.G., & Gardner, M.J. (1990). More informative abstracts revisited. Annals of Internal Medicine, 113, 69-76.
11. Holden, G., Thyer, B.A., Baer, J., Delva, J., Dulmus, C.N., & Shanks, T.W. (2008). Suggestions to improve social work journal editorial and peer-review processes: The San Antonio response to the Miami Statement. Research on Social Work Practice, 18, 66-71.
12. Holosko, M.J. (2006 a). A suggested authors' checklist for submitting manuscripts to Research on Social Work Practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 16, 449-454.
13. Holosko, M.J. (2006 b). Primer for critiquing social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
14. McIntosh, N., Duc, G., & Sedin, G. (1999). Structure improves content and peer review of abstracts submitted to scientific meetings. European Science Editing, 25, 43-47.
15. Mulrow, C.D., Thacker, S.B., & Pugh, J.A. (1988). A proposal for more informative abstracts of review articles. Annals of Internal Medicine, 108, 613-615.
16. Rosen, A., Proctor, E.K., & Staudt, M.M. (1999). Social work research and the quest for effective practice. Social Work Research, 23, 4-14.
17. Schilling, R., et al. (2005). Peer review and publication standards in social work journals: The Miami statement. Social Work Research, 29, 119-121.
18. Society for Social Work and Research. (2008). Journal publication practices in social work: Final report from the Society for Social Work and Research Presidential Task Force on Publications. Fairfax, VA: Author.
19. Taddio, A., Pain, T., Fassos, F.F., Boon, H., Ilersich, A.L., & Einarson, T.R. (1994). Quality of non-structured 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. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 150, 1611-1615.
20. Winker, M.A. (1999). The need for concrete improvement in abstract quality. Journal of the American Medical Association, 281, 1129-1130.