how to write a presentation abstract

• Contact AAPS
• Get the Newsletter

How to Write a Really Great Presentation Abstract

Whether this is your first abstract submission or you just need a refresher on best practices when writing a conference abstract, these tips are for you..

An abstract for a presentation should include most the following sections. Sometimes they will only be a sentence each since abstracts are typically short (250 words):

• What (the focus): Clearly explain your idea or question your work addresses (i.e. how to recruit participants in a retirement community, a new perspective on the concept of “participant” in citizen science, a strategy for taking results to local government agencies).
• Why (the purpose): Explain why your focus is important (i.e. older people in retirement communities are often left out of citizen science; participants in citizen science are often marginalized as “just” data collectors; taking data to local governments is rarely successful in changing policy, etc.)
• How (the methods): Describe how you collected information/data to answer your question. Your methods might be quantitative (producing a number-based result, such as a count of participants before and after your intervention), or qualitative (producing or documenting information that is not metric-based such as surveys or interviews to document opinions, or motivations behind a person’s action) or both.
• Results: Share your results — the information you collected. What does the data say? (e.g. Retirement community members respond best to in-person workshops; participants described their participation in the following ways, 6 out of 10 attempts to influence a local government resulted in policy changes ).
• Conclusion : State your conclusion(s) by relating your data to your original question. Discuss the connections between your results and the problem (retirement communities are a wonderful resource for new participants; when we broaden the definition of “participant” the way participants describe their relationship to science changes; involvement of a credentialed scientist increases the likelihood of success of evidence being taken seriously by local governments.). If your project is still ‘in progress’ and you don’t yet have solid conclusions, use this space to discuss what you know at the moment (i.e. lessons learned so far, emerging trends, etc).

Here is a sample abstract submitted to a previous conference as an example:

Giving participants feedback about the data they help to collect can be a critical (and sometimes ignored) part of a healthy citizen science cycle. One study on participant motivations in citizen science projects noted “When scientists were not cognizant of providing periodic feedback to their volunteers, volunteers felt peripheral, became demotivated, and tended to forgo future work on those projects” (Rotman et al, 2012). In that same study, the authors indicated that scientists tended to overlook the importance of feedback to volunteers, missing their critical interest in the science and the value to participants when their contributions were recognized. Prioritizing feedback for volunteers adds value to a project, but can be daunting for project staff. This speed talk will cover 3 different kinds of visual feedback that can be utilized to keep participants in-the-loop. We’ll cover strengths and weaknesses of each visualization and point people to tools available on the Web to help create powerful visualizations. Rotman, D., Preece, J., Hammock, J., Procita, K., Hansen, D., Parr, C., et al. (2012). Dynamic changes in motivation in collaborative citizen-science projects. the ACM 2012 conference (pp. 217–226). New York, New York, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/2145204.2145238

📊   Data Ethics  – Refers to trustworthy data practices for citizen science.

Get involved » Join the Data Ethics Topic Room on CSA Connect!

📰   Publication Ethics  – Refers to the best practice in the ethics of scholarly publishing.

Get involved » Join the Publication Ethics Topic Room on CSA Connect!

⚖️  Social Justice Ethics  – Refers to fair and just relations between the individual and society as measured by the distribution of wealth, opportunities for personal activity, and social privileges. Social justice also encompasses inclusiveness and diversity.

Get involved » Join the Social Justice Topic Room on CSA Connect!

👤   Human Subject Ethics  – Refers to rules of conduct in any research involving humans including biomedical research, social studies. Note that this goes beyond human subject ethics regulations as much of what goes on isn’t covered.

Get involved » Join the Human Subject Ethics Topic Room on CSA Connect!

🍃  Biodiversity & Environmental Ethics – Refers to the improvement of the dynamics between humans and the myriad of species that combine to create the biosphere, which will ultimately benefit both humans and non-humans alike [UNESCO 2011 white paper on Ethics and Biodiversity ]. This is a kind of ethics that is advancing rapidly in light of the current global crisis as many stakeholders know how critical biodiversity is to the human species (e.g., public health, women’s rights, social and environmental justice).

⚠ UNESCO also affirms that respect for biological diversity implies respect for societal and cultural diversity, as both elements are intimately interconnected and fundamental to global well-being and peace. ( Source ).

Get involved » Join the Biodiversity & Environmental Ethics Topic Room on CSA Connect!

🤝  Community Partnership Ethics – Refers to rules of engagement and respect of community members directly or directly involved or affected by any research study/project.

Get involved » Join the Community Partnership Ethics Topic Room on CSA Connect!

Academic & Employability Skills

Subscribe to academic & employability skills.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 419 other subscribers.

Email Address

Writing an abstract - a six point checklist (with samples)

Posted in: abstract , dissertations

The abstract is a vital part of any research paper. It is the shop front for your work, and the first stop for your reader. It should provide a clear and succinct summary of your study, and encourage your readers to read more. An effective abstract, therefore should answer the following questions:

• Why did you do this study or project?
• What did you do and how?
• What did you find?
• What do your findings mean?

So here's our run down of the key elements of a well-written abstract.

• Size - A succinct and well written abstract should be between approximately 100- 250 words.
• Background - An effective abstract usually includes some scene-setting information which might include what is already known about the subject, related to the paper in question (a few short sentences).
• Purpose  - The abstract should also set out the purpose of your research, in other words, what is not known about the subject and hence what the study intended to examine (or what the paper seeks to present).
• Methods - The methods section should contain enough information to enable the reader to understand what was done, and how. It should include brief details of the research design, sample size, duration of study, and so on.
• Results - The results section is the most important part of the abstract. This is because readers who skim an abstract do so to learn about the findings of the study. The results section should therefore contain as much detail about the findings as the journal word count permits.
• Conclusion - This section should contain the most important take-home message of the study, expressed in a few precisely worded sentences. Usually, the finding highlighted here relates to the primary outcomes of the study. However, other important or unexpected findings should also be mentioned. It is also customary, but not essential, to express an opinion about the theoretical or practical implications of the findings, or the importance of their findings for the field. Thus, the conclusions may contain three elements:
• The primary take-home message.
• Any additional findings of importance.
• Implications for future studies.

Example Abstract 2: Engineering Development and validation of a three-dimensional finite element model of the pelvic bone.

Abstract from: Dalstra, M., Huiskes, R. and Van Erning, L., 1995. Development and validation of a three-dimensional finite element model of the pelvic bone. Journal of biomechanical engineering, 117(3), pp.272-278.

And finally...  A word on abstract types and styles

Abstract types can differ according to subject discipline. You need to determine therefore which type of abstract you should include with your paper. Here are two of the most common types with examples.

Informative Abstract

The majority of abstracts are informative. While they still do not critique or evaluate a work, they do more than describe it. A good informative abstract acts as a surrogate for the work itself. That is, the researcher presents and explains all the main arguments and the important results and evidence in the paper. An informative abstract includes the information that can be found in a descriptive abstract [purpose, methods, scope] but it also includes the results and conclusions of the research and the recommendations of the author. The length varies according to discipline, but an informative abstract is usually no more than 300 words in length.

Descriptive Abstract A descriptive abstract indicates the type of information found in the work. It makes no judgements about the work, nor does it provide results or conclusions of the research. It does incorporate key words found in the text and may include the purpose, methods, and scope of the research. Essentially, the descriptive abstract only describes the work being summarised. Some researchers consider it an outline of the work, rather than a summary. Descriptive abstracts are usually very short, 100 words or less.

Adapted from Andrade C. How to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation. Indian J Psychiatry. 2011 Apr;53(2):172-5. doi: 10.4103/0019-5545.82558. PMID: 21772657; PMCID: PMC3136027 .

Share this:

• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

Click here to cancel reply.

• Email * (we won't publish this)

Write a response

Navigating the dissertation process: my tips for final years

Imagine for a moment... After months of hard work and research on a topic you're passionate about, the time has finally come to click the 'Submit' button on your dissertation. You've just completed your longest project to date as part...

8 ways to beat procrastination

Whether you’re writing an assignment or revising for exams, getting started can be hard. Fortunately, there’s lots you can do to turn procrastination into action.

My takeaways on how to write a scientific report

If you’re in your dissertation writing stage or your course includes writing a lot of scientific reports, but you don’t quite know where and how to start, the Skills Centre can help you get started. I recently attended their ‘How...

• Conference Planning
• Continuing Education
• Event Industry News & Trends
• Session Management
• Speaker Management

Home Conference Planning How to Write Abstracts for a Conference

How to Write Abstracts for a Conference

Michelle Schweitz

June 17, 2024

Writing an abstract for a conference can be a daunting task, whether you’re a seasoned researcher, an academic, a professional, or a student. Crafting a compelling abstract is crucial as it not only showcases your research or ideas but also determines whether your work will be accepted and noticed by conference organizers and attendees.

Our team is here to help via this blog post offering clear instructions and examples to guide you through the process of writing effective conference abstracts. Our goal is to ensure you can communicate your research or ideas succinctly and persuasively, maximizing your chances of making a significant impact at your next conference.

Let’s get started!

Writing Abstract Papers, Poster Submissions, and Panels

Preparing for a conference involves several key components, one of the most critical being the submission of abstracts. Whether you’re submitting an abstract paper, a poster, or proposing a panel, each type of submission has its unique requirements and challenges .

• Abstract Papers : These are concise summaries of your research. They highlight the key points of your study, including your research question, methods, results, and conclusions. Abstract papers are usually submitted as part of a conference proceedings or as a standalone presentation.
• Poster Submissions : Posters visually represent your research and are usually displayed during a designated session at the conference. The abstract for a poster submission should briefly outline your research’s main points and emphasize the visual elements that will be included in the poster.
• Panels : Panels are sessions involving multiple speakers discussing a common theme or topic. An abstract for a panel should outline the session’s overall theme, the individual contributions of each panelist, and how these contributions interrelate to form a cohesive discussion.

How Long Should a Conference Abstract Be?

The length of a conference abstract can vary significantly depending on the conference’s guidelines. Generally, abstracts should be succinct, ranging from 150 to 500 words. It’s crucial to check the specific requirements of the conference to which you’re submitting, as some may have strict word limits.

• Short Abstracts (150-250 words) : These abstracts are typically required for poster sessions or brief presentations. They should include only the most critical elements of your research: the problem statement, methodology, key findings, and conclusions.
• Medium-Length Abstracts (250-350 words) : These are common for oral presentations and should provide a bit more detail about your research. In addition to the basics, you can include more context or background information.
• Long Abstracts (350-500 words) : These are often required for panel proposals or more comprehensive presentations and must offer a thorough overview of your research, including detailed methodology, along with a discussion of the implications of your findings.

What Should an Abstract Include?

A well-crafted abstract should give readers a clear and concise summary of your research. Here are the essential components that should be included :

• Title : The title should be clear, concise, and descriptive, giving readers a quick overview of your research topic. In fact, according to Dormain Drewitz, writing for Medium, titles are critical: “Your title is the most valuable real estate when selling your talk to a track organizer and prospective audience.”
• Introduction/Background : Provide context for your research. What is the problem or question your research addresses? Why is it important?
• Research Question or Objective : Clearly state the main research question or objective. This will help readers understand the purpose of your study.
• Methodology : Briefly describe the methods you used to conduct your research. This could include your study design, data collection methods, and analysis techniques.
• Results : Summarize the key findings of your research. Be concise and focus on the most significant results.Conclusion: Highlight the main conclusions or implications of your research. How do your findings contribute to the field? What are the broader impacts?

Tips and Strategies for Standing Out with Your Conference Abstract

Writing an effective conference abstract requires clear communication and strategic presentation. Use these tips to help your abstract stand out:

• Be Clear and Concise : Use straightforward language and avoid unnecessary jargon. Your abstract should be easy to read and understand, even for those not familiar with your specific area of research.
• Follow the Guidelines : Adhere strictly to the conference’s submission guidelines. This includes word count, formatting, and any specific content requirements.
• Highlight the Novelty : Emphasize what is new or unique about your research. What sets it apart from other studies in your field?
• Use a Structured Format : Organize your abstract with clear headings for each section (e.g., Background, Methods, Results, Conclusion). This makes it easier for reviewers to follow your argument.
• Proofread : Ensure your abstract is free from grammatical and typographical errors. A polished abstract reflects well on your professionalism and attention to detail.
• Use Active Voice : Write in an active voice to make your abstract more engaging and dynamic. This can help maintain the reader’s interest.

Examples of Abstracts

To illustrate these points, here is an example of a well-crafted conference abstract:

• Title : Investigating the Impact of Social Media on Academic Performance
• Introduction : The increasing use of social media among students has raised concerns about its potential impact on academic performance. This study examines the relationship between social media usage and academic success.
• Research Question : How does the frequency and type of social media use affect the academic performance of college students?
• Methodology : A survey was conducted among 500 college students, collecting data on their social media habits and GPA. Multiple regression analysis was used to examine the relationship between social media use and academic performance.
• Results : The analysis revealed a negative correlation between time spent on social media and GPA. However, students who used social media for academic purposes reported better academic outcomes than those who used it primarily for entertainment.
• Conclusion : The findings suggest that while excessive social media use can negatively impact academic performance, using social media as a tool for academic engagement can have positive effects. Educators should consider integrating social media into their teaching strategies to leverage its benefits.

Common Mistakes to Avoid in Conference Abstracts

When writing your conference abstract, be mindful of these common pitfalls :

• Lack of Clarity : Ensure your abstract clearly communicates your research question, methods, results, and conclusions. Avoid vague statements and ensure each section is well-defined.
• Overuse of Jargon : While technical terms are sometimes necessary, excessive use of jargon can make your abstract difficult to understand. Aim for clarity and simplicity.
• Insufficient Detail : Provide enough detail to give readers a clear understanding of your research. Avoid being too brief, which can leave readers with unanswered questions.
• Ignoring Guidelines : Each conference has specific guidelines for abstract submissions. Failing to adhere to these can result in your abstract being rejected outright.
• Poor Structure : A disorganized abstract can confuse readers and detract from your message. Use a structured format with clear headings for each section.
• Neglecting the Audience : Consider the audience of the conference. Tailor your abstract to their interests and level of expertise.
• Weak Titles : Your title is the first thing readers see. Ensure it accurately reflects your research and grabs attention.

6 Additional Abstract Considerations…

• Understanding Your Audience : Before writing your abstract, it’s crucial to understand who will be reading it. Tailor your language and content to the conference’s audience, considering their level of expertise and interests.
• The Importance of Keywords : Keywords help index your abstract for search engines and databases. Choose relevant keywords that accurately reflect your research topic and ensure they are included in your abstract.
• Revising and Refining Your Abstract : Writing an effective abstract often involves multiple drafts. Take the time to revise and refine your abstract, seeking feedback from colleagues or mentors to ensure clarity and impact.
• The Role of Visuals in Poster Abstracts : For poster submissions, consider how visuals will complement your abstract. Mention key figures or tables included in your poster to give reviewers a sense of your presentation’s visual elements.
• Aligning with Conference Themes : Many conferences have specific themes or focus areas. Align your abstract with these themes to increase the chances of acceptance. Highlight how your research contributes to the conference’s overarching topics.
• Ethical Considerations in Abstract Writing : Ensure your abstract honestly represents your research. Avoid overstating your findings or making unsupported claims. Ethical integrity is paramount in academic writing.

Congratulations! You’re Ready to Amplify Your Abstracts.

Now that you understand the components of a well-crafted abstract, adhering to guidelines, and employing strategies to make your submission stand out, you can increase the chances of your research being accepted and showcased at conferences.

Just remember to avoid the common mistakes as we’ve outlined them, refine your writing, and tailor your abstract to your audience for the best results.

Ultimately, your abstract is the first impression reviewers and attendees will have of your work— we’re confident you will make it count!

Read to build a diverse event experience with multi-type submissions?

Position your team as an expert resource for submitters.

Stay on top of the latest and greatest. Sign up now.

Recommended for you.

02/16/24 Conference Planning

Top 25 conference content marketing ideas  .

01/25/24 Conference Planning

What makes a good conference venue 5 factors to consider  .

01/18/24 Conference Planning

How technology propels continuing education management  , subscribe today.

Reference management. Clean and simple.

How to write an abstract

What is an abstract?

General format of an abstract, the content of an abstract, abstract example, abstract style guides, frequently asked questions about writing an abstract, related articles.

An abstract is a summary of the main contents of a paper.

The abstract is the first glimpse that readers get of the content of a research paper. It can influence the popularity of a paper, as a well-written one will attract readers, and a poorly-written one will drive them away.

➡️ Different types of papers may require distinct abstract styles. Visit our guide on the different types of research papers to learn more.

Tip: Always wait until you’ve written your entire paper before you write the abstract.

Before you actually start writing an abstract, make sure to follow these steps:

• Read other papers : find papers with similar topics, or similar methodologies, simply to have an idea of how others have written their abstracts. Notice which points they decided to include, and how in depth they described them.
• Double check the journal requirements : always make sure to review the journal guidelines to format your paper accordingly. Usually, they also specify abstract's formats.
• Write the abstract after you finish writing the paper : you can only write an abstract once you finish writing the whole paper. This way you can include all important aspects, such as scope, methodology, and conclusion.

➡️ Read more about  what is a research methodology?

The general format of an abstract includes the following features:

• Between 150-300 words .
• An independent page , after the title page and before the table of contents.
• Concise summary including the aim of the research, methodology , and conclusion .
• Keywords describing the content.

As mentioned before, an abstract is a text that summarizes the main points of a research. Here is a break down of each element that should be included in an abstract:

• Purpose : every abstract should start by describing the main purpose or aim of the research.
• Methods : as a second point, the methodology carried out should be explained.
• Results : then, a concise summary of the results should be included.
• Conclusion : finally, a short outline of the general outcome of the research should be given.
• Keywords : along with the abstract, specific words and phrases related to the topics discussed in the research should be added. These words are usually around five, but the number can vary depending on the journal's guidelines.

This abstract, taken from ScienceDirect , illustrates the ideal structure of an abstract. It has 155 words, it's concise, and it clearly shows the division of elements necessary to write a successful abstract.

This paper explores the implicit assumption in the growing body of literature that social media usage is fundamentally different in business-to-business (B2B) companies than in the extant business-to-consumer (B2C) literature. Sashi's (2012) customer engagement cycle is utilized to compare organizational practices in relation to social media marketing in B2B, B2C, Mixed B2B/B2C and B2B2C business models. Utilizing 449 responses to an exploratory panel based survey instrument, we clearly identify differences in social media usage and its perceived importance as a communications channel. In particular we identify distinct differences in the relationship between social media importance and the perceived effectiveness of social media marketing across business models. Our results indicate that B2B social media usage is distinct from B2C, Mixed and B2B2C business model approaches. Specifically B2B organizational members perceive social media to have a lower overall effectiveness as a channel and identify it as less important for relationship oriented usage than other business models.

The exact format of an abstract depends on the citation style you implement. Whether it’s a well-known style (like APA, IEEE, etc.) or a journal's style, each format has its own guidelines, so make sure you know which style you are using before writing your abstract.

APA is one of the most commonly used styles to format an abstract. Therefore, we created a guide with exact instructions on how to write an abstract in APA style, and a template to download:

📕 APA abstract page: format and template

Additionally, you will find below an IEEE and ASA abstract guide by Purdue Online Writing Lab :

📗 IEEE General Format - Abstract

📘 ASA Manuscript Formatting - Abstract

No. You should always write an abstract once you finish writing the whole paper. This way you can include all important aspects of the paper, such as scope, methodology, and conclusion.

The length of an abstract depends on the formatting style of the paper. For example, APA style calls for 150 to 250 words. Generally, you need between 150-300 words.

No. An abstract has an independent section after the title page and before the table of contents, and should not be included in the table of contents.

Take a look at APA abstract page: format and template for exact details on how to format an abstract in APA style.

You can access any paper through Google Scholar or any other search engine; pick a paper and read the abstract. Abstracts are always freely available to read.

• Search Events
• Subscription

Login/Register

How to Write an Abstract for a Conference: The Ultimate Guide

Are you thinking about attending a conference? If so, you will likely be asked to submit an abstract beforehand. An abstract is an ultra-brief summary of your proposed presentation; it should be no longer than 300 words and contain just the key points of your speech. A conference abstract is also known as a registration prospectus, an information document or a proposal. It is effectively a pitch document that explains why your speech would be of value to the audience at that particular conference – and why they need to hear it from you rather than anyone else! Creating an effective abstract is not always easy, and if this is the first time you have been asked to write one it can feel like quite a challenge. However, don’t panic! This blog post covers everything you need to know about how to write an abstract for a conference – read on to get started now!

What Exactly is an Abstract?

As we have already mentioned, an abstract is a super-brief summary of your proposed presentation. An abstract is used in several different fields and industries, but it’s most often found in the worlds of research, academia and business. An abstract allows the reader to get a quick overview of the main points of a longer document, such as a research paper, a dissertation or a business plan. It’s therefore a useful tool for helping people to get up to speed with your work quickly. Abstracts are also used to summarize conference presentations. A conference abstract is effectively a pitch document that explains why your speech would be of value to the audience at that particular conference – and why they need to hear it from you rather than anyone else!

Why is an abstract important?

Conference organizers need to be able to effectively communicate what the event is about, who should attend and what each speaker will be talking about. This can often be challenging when there are hundreds of different speakers and presentations on a wide range of topics. By creating an abstract, you’re helping the event organizers by providing them with a concise overview of your speech. This is useful because it allows the organizers to quickly and easily communicate the key points of your presentation to the rest of the conference team and conference attendees. Conference abstracts are, therefore, essential for pitching your speech to the organizer – and hopefully securing a place on the conference schedule!

How to write an effective abstract?

If you have ever read the abstracts for research papers, you’ll know that they can vary significantly in quality. Some are written in a very engaging, straightforward style that’s easy to understand, whereas others can be overly complex and difficult to comprehend. You want your abstract to be engaging and easy for your readers to understand, so we recommend keeping the following points in mind when you’re writing yours: 

– Keep it brief. An abstract should be no longer than 300 words. 

– Keep it relevant. An abstract is not a replacement for your actual presentation, so don’t include any information that isn’t relevant to the topic of your speech. 

– Keep it accurate. Make sure that everything you include in your abstract is correct – if you get something wrong, you could have to correct it during your presentation! 

– Keep it interesting. Your abstract should be engaging and exciting to read. 

– Keep it professional. Even though it’s a short piece of writing, your abstract should be written professionally and engagingly.

  Final words

As you can see, creating an abstract can be challenging, mainly if this is the first time you have been asked to write one. However, by following the tips and suggestions in this blog post, you should be able to create an effective, engaging and easy-to-understand abstract. With a little preparation, you should be able to create a compelling abstract that will help you get your foot on the conference speaking circuit!

Thank you liked those tips.

Good advice

Write a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Search Blog

Recent posts.

Navigating the Future of Education: Academic Conferences as a Hub for Insights, Ideas, and Best Practices

How to Prepare for a Conference: A Checklist of Tips to Make the Most of Your Experience

How a Virtual Conference Can Help You Reach Your Professional Goals

Create an Event Website: A Tutorial to Design.

7 Tips for How to Network at a Conference

• About the LSE Impact Blog
• Comments Policy
• Popular Posts
• Recent Posts
• Subscribe to the Impact Blog
• Write for us
• LSE comment

January 27th, 2015

How to write a killer conference abstract: the first step towards an engaging presentation..

34 comments | 133 shares

Estimated reading time: 6 minutes

Helen Kara responds to our previously published guide to writing abstracts and elaborates specifically on the differences for conference abstracts. She offers tips for writing an enticing abstract for conference organisers and an engaging conference presentation. Written grammar is different from spoken grammar. Remember that conference organisers are trying to create as interesting and stimulating an event as they can, and variety is crucial.

Enjoying this blogpost? 📨 Sign up to our  mailing list  and receive all the latest LSE Impact Blog news direct to your inbox.

The Impact blog has an  ‘essential ‘how-to’ guide to writing good abstracts’ . While this post makes some excellent points, its title and first sentence don’t differentiate between article and conference abstracts. The standfirst talks about article abstracts, but then the first sentence is, ‘Abstracts tend to be rather casually written, perhaps at the beginning of writing when authors don’t yet really know what they want to say, or perhaps as a rushed afterthought just before submission to a journal or a conference.’ This, coming so soon after the title, gives the impression that the post is about both article and conference abstracts.

I think there are some fundamental differences between the two. For example:

• Article abstracts are presented to journal editors along with the article concerned. Conference abstracts are presented alone to conference organisers. This means that journal editors or peer reviewers can say e.g. ‘great article but the abstract needs work’, while a poor abstract submitted to a conference organiser is very unlikely to be accepted.
• Articles are typically 4,000-8,000 words long. Conference presentation slots usually allow 20 minutes so, given that – for good listening comprehension – presenters should speak at around 125 words per minute, a conference presentation should be around 2,500 words long.
• Articles are written to be read from the page, while conference presentations are presented in person. Written grammar is different from spoken grammar, and there is nothing so tedious for a conference audience than the old-skool approach of reading your written presentation from the page. Fewer people do this now – but still, too many. It’s unethical to bore people! You need to engage your audience, and conference organisers will like to know how you intend to hold their interest.

Image credit:  allanfernancato  ( Pixabay, CC0 Public Domain )

The competition for getting a conference abstract accepted is rarely as fierce as the competition for getting an article accepted. Some conferences don’t even receive as many abstracts as they have presentation slots. But even then, they’re more likely to re-arrange their programme than to accept a poor quality abstract. And you can’t take it for granted that your abstract won’t face much competition. I’ve recently read over 90 abstracts submitted for the  Creative Research Methods conference in May  – for 24 presentation slots. As a result, I have four useful tips to share with you about how to write a killer conference abstract.

First , your conference abstract is a sales tool: you are selling your ideas, first to the conference organisers, and then to the conference delegates. You need to make your abstract as fascinating and enticing as possible. And that means making it different. So take a little time to think through some key questions:

• What kinds of presentations is this conference most likely to attract? How can you make yours different?
• What are the fashionable areas in your field right now? Are you working in one of these areas? If so, how can you make your presentation different from others doing the same? If not, how can you make your presentation appealing?

There may be clues in the call for papers, so study this carefully. For example, we knew that the  Creative Research Methods conference , like all general methods conferences, was likely to receive a majority of abstracts covering data collection methods. So we stated up front, in the call for papers, that we knew this was likely, and encouraged potential presenters to offer creative methods of planning research, reviewing literature, analysing data, writing research, and so on. Even so, around three-quarters of the abstracts we received focused on data collection. This meant that each of those abstracts was less likely to be accepted than an abstract focusing on a different aspect of the research process, because we wanted to offer delegates a good balance of presentations.

Currently fashionable areas in the field of research methods include research using social media and autoethnography/ embodiment. We received quite a few abstracts addressing these, but again, in the interests of balance, were only likely to accept one (at most) in each area. Remember that conference organisers are trying to create as interesting and stimulating an event as they can, and variety is crucial.

Second , write your abstract well. Unless your abstract is for a highly academic and theoretical conference, wear your learning lightly. Engaging concepts in plain English, with a sprinkling of references for context, is much more appealing to conference organisers wading through sheaves of abstracts than complicated sentences with lots of long words, definitions of terms, and several dozen references. Conference organisers are not looking for evidence that you can do really clever writing (save that for your article abstracts), they are looking for evidence that you can give an entertaining presentation.

Third , conference abstracts written in the future tense are off-putting for conference organisers, because they don’t make it clear that the potential presenter knows what they’ll be talking about. I was surprised by how many potential presenters did this. If your presentation will include information about work you’ll be doing in between the call for papers and the conference itself (which is entirely reasonable as this can be a period of six months or more), then make that clear. So, for example, don’t say, ‘This presentation will cover the problems I encounter when I analyse data with homeless young people, and how I solve those problems’, say, ‘I will be analysing data with homeless young people over the next three months, and in the following three months I will prepare a presentation about the problems we encountered while doing this and how we tackled those problems’.

Fourth , of course you need to tell conference organisers about your research: its context, method, and findings. It will also help enormously if you can take a sentence or three to explain what you intend to include in the presentation itself. So, perhaps something like, ‘I will briefly outline the process of participatory data analysis we developed, supported by slides. I will then show a two-minute video which will illustrate both the process in action and some of the problems encountered. After that, again using slides, I will outline each of the problems and how we tackled them in practice.’ This will give conference organisers some confidence that you can actually put together and deliver an engaging presentation.

So, to summarise, to maximise your chances of success when submitting conference abstracts:

• Make your abstract fascinating, enticing, and different.
• Write your abstract well, using plain English wherever possible.
• Don’t write in the future tense if you can help it – and, if you must, specify clearly what you will do and when.
• Explain your research, and also give an explanation of what you intend to include in the presentation.

While that won’t guarantee success, it will massively increase your chances. Best of luck!

This post originally appeared on the author’s personal blog and is reposted with permission.

Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Impact of Social Science blog, nor of the London School of Economics. Please review our  Comments Policy  if you have any concerns on posting a comment below.

About the Author

Dr Helen Kara has been an independent social researcher in social care and health since 1999, and is an Associate Research Fellow at the Third Sector Research Centre , University of Birmingham. She is on the Board of the UK’s Social Research Association , with lead responsibility for research ethics. She also teaches research methods to practitioners and students, and writes on research methods. Helen is the author of Research and Evaluation for Busy Practitioners (2012) and Creative Research Methods in the Social Sciences (April 2015) , both published by Policy Press . She did her first degree in Social Psychology at the LSE.

About the author

Dr Helen Kara FAcSS has been an independent researcher since 1999 and an independent scholar since 2011. She writes about research methods and research ethics, and teaches doctoral students and staff at higher education institutions worldwide. Her books include Creative Research Methods: A Practical Guide and Research Ethics in the Real World: Euro-Western and Indigenous Perspectives for Policy Press, and Qualitative Research for Quantitative Researchers for SAGE. She is an Affiliate at Swansea University and a Visiting Fellow at the Australian National University.

34 Comments

Personally, I’d rather not see reading a presentation written off so easily, for three off the cuff reasons:

1) Reading can be done really well, especially if the paper was written to be read.

2) It seems to be well suited to certain kinds of qualitative studies, particularly those that are narrative driven.

3) It seems to require a different kind of focus or concentration — one that requires more intensive listening (as opposed to following an outline driven presentation that’s supplemented with visuals, i.e., slides).

Admittedly, I’ve read some papers before, and writing them to be read can be a rewarding process, too. I had to pay attention to details differently: structure, tone, story, etc. It can be an insightful process, especially for works in progress.

Sean, thanks for your comment, which I think is a really useful addition to the discussion. I’ve sat through so many turgid not-written-to-be-read presentations that it never occurred to me they could be done well until I heard your thoughts. What you say makes a great deal of sense to me, particularly with presentations that are consciously ‘written to be read’ out loud. I think where they can get tedious is where a paper written for the page is read out loud instead, because for me that really doesn’t work. But I love to listen to stories, and I think of some of the quality storytelling that is broadcast on radio, and of audiobooks that work well (again, in my experience, they don’t all), and I do entirely see your point.

Helen, I appreciate your encouraging me remark on such a minor part of your post(!), which I enjoyed reading and will share. And thank you for the reply and the exchange on Twitter.

Very much enjoyed your post Helen. And your subsequent comments Sean. On the subject of the reading of a presentation. I agree that some people can write a paper specifically to be read and this can be done well. But I would think that this is a dying art. Perhaps in the humanities it might survive longer. Reading through the rest of your post I love the advice. I’m presenting at my first LIS conference next month and had I read your post first I probably would have written it differently. Advice for the future for me.

Martin – and Sean – thank you so much for your kind comments. Maybe there are steps we can take to keep the art alive; advocates for it, such as Sean, will no doubt help. And, Martin, if you’re presenting next month, you must have done perfectly well all by yourself! Congratulations on the acceptance, and best of luck for the presentation.

Great article! Obvious at it may seem, a point zero may be added before the other four: which _are_ your ideas?

A scientific writing coach told me she often runs a little exercise with her students. She tells them to put away their (journal) abstract and then asks them to summarize the bottom line in three statements. After some thinking, the students come up with an answer. Then the coach tells the students to reach for the abstract, read it and look for the bottom line they just summarised. Very often, they find that their own main observations and/or conclusions are not clearly expressed in the abstract.

PS I love the line “It’s unethical to bore people!” 🙂

Thanks for your comment, Olle – that’s a great point. I think something happens to us when we’re writing, in which we become so clear about what we want to say that we think we’ve said it even when we haven’t. Your friend’s exercise sounds like a great trick for finding out when we’ve done that. And thanks for the compliments, too!

• Pingback: How to write a conference abstract | Blog @HEC Paris Library
• Pingback: Writer’s Paralysis | Helen Kara
• Pingback: Weekend reads: - Retraction Watch at Retraction Watch
• Pingback: The Weekly Roundup | The Graduate School
• Pingback: My Top 10 Abstract Writing tips | Jon Rainford's Blog
• Pingback: Review of the Year 2015 | Helen Kara
• Pingback: Impact of Social Sciences – 2015 Year-In-Review: LSE Impact Blog’s Most Popular Posts

Thank you very much for the tips, they are really helpful. I have actually been accepted to present a PuchaKucha presentation in an educational interdisciplinary conference at my university. my presentation would be about the challenges faced by women in my country. So, it would be just a review of the literature. from what I’ve been reading, conferences are about new research and your new ideas… Is what I’m doing wrong??? that’s my first conference I’ll be speaking in and I’m afraid to ruin it!!! I will be really grateful about any advice ^_^

First of all: you’re not going to ruin the conference, even if you think you made a bad presentation. You should always remember that people are not very concerned about you–they are mostly concerned about themselves. Take comfort in that thought!

Here are some notes: • If it is a Pecha Kucha night, you stand in front of a mixed audience. Remember that scientists understand layman’s stuff, but laymen don’t understand scientists stuff. • Pecha Kucha is also very VISUAL! Remember that you can’t control the flow of slides – they change every 20 seconds. • Make your main messages clear. You can use either one of these templates.

A. Which are the THREE most important observations, conclusions, implications or messages from your study?

B. Inform them! (LOGOS) Engage them! (PATHOS) Make an impression! (ETHOS)

C. What do you do as a scientist/is a study about? What problem(s) do you address? How is your research different? Why should I care?

Good luck and remember to focus on (1) the audience, (2) your mission, (3) your stuff and (4) yourself, in that order.

• Pingback: How to choose a conference then write an abstract that gets you noticed | The Research Companion
• Pingback: Impact of Social Sciences – Impact Community Insights: Five things we learned from our Reader Survey and Google Analytics.
• Pingback: Giving Us The Space To Think Things Through… | Research Into Practice Group
• Pingback: The Scholar-Practitioner Paradox for Academic Writing [@BreakDrink Episode No. 8] – techKNOWtools

I don’t know whether it’s just me or if perhaps everybody else encountering problems with your site. It appears as if some of the text in your content are running off the screen. Can someone else please comment and let me know if this is happening to them as well? This could be a issue with my browser because I’ve had this happen before. Thank you

• Pingback: Exhibition, abstracts and a letter from Prince Harry – EAHIL 2018
• Pingback: How to write a great abstract | DEWNR-NRM-Science-Conference
• Pingback: Abstracting and postering for conferences – ECRAG

Thank you Dr Kara for the great guide on creating killer abstracts for conferences. I am preparing to write an abstract for my first conference presentation and this has been educative and insightful. ‘ I choose to be ethical and not bore my audience’.

Thank you Judy for your kind comment. I wish you luck with your abstract and your presentation. Helen

• Pingback: Tips to Write a Strong Abstract for a Conference Paper – Research Synergy Institute

Dear Dr. Helen Kara, Can there be an abstract for a topic presentation? I need to present a topic in a conference.I searched in the net and couldnt find anything like an abstract for a topic presentation but only found abstract for article presentation. Urgent.Help!

Dear Rekha Sthapit, I think it would be the same – but if in doubt, you could ask the conference organisers to clarify what they mean by ‘topic presentation’. Good luck!

• Pingback: 2020: The Top Posts of the Decade | Impact of Social Sciences
• Pingback: Capturing the abstract: what ARE conference abstracts and what are they FOR? (James Burford & Emily F. Henderson) – Conference Inference
• Pingback: LSEUPR 2022 Conference | LSE Undergraduate Political Review
• Pingback: New Occupational Therapy Research Conference: Integrating research into your role – Glasgow Caledonian University Occupational Therapy Blog

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Related Posts

‘It could be effective…’: Uncertainty and over-promotion in the abstracts of COVID-19 preprints

September 30th, 2021.

How to design an award-winning conference poster

May 11th, 2018.

Are scientific findings exaggerated? Study finds steady increase of superlatives in PubMed abstracts.

January 26th, 2016.

An antidote to futility: Why academics (and students) should take blogging / social media seriously

October 26th, 2015.

Visit our sister blog LSE Review of Books

How to Write a Presentation Abstract for a Tech Conference

on December 22, 2015

I Hate Writing Abstracts.

I love writing presentations. I like outlining them, I like writing the demos, putting the slides together. I even like reconsidering everything, backing up, scrapping it, and starting from a new approach!

But I hate writing abstracts. It’s just tough to capture your vision in the format a conference organizer wants. And often, if I’m writing the abstract before the presentation is done, I’m wary about possibly describing something that I’ll want to change later.

I’ve Developed a Formula to Cope With It

Staring at a blank piece of paper (or a blank sheet in the Mou Markdown editor , in my case), is the toughest part. As I was writing my abstracts, I realized that I’ve developed a formula that gets me immediately past that blank paper and into the abstract.

The biggest part of the secret is that I don’t write the title or the first sentence of the abstract first. For whatever reason, that’s incredibly hard.

If You Hate Writing Abstracts (Or Just Don’t Know Where to Start), Here’s My Formula

• Target audience : Write a short note describing your target audience. I write for SQL Server conferences, so I think about their job role and how much experience they have. This step is really important because it orients your  whole session, not just the abstract
• Outline : Write a brief outline of the topics that you’ll cover. Some conference organizers want to see this, but this is largely for yourself. What concepts will you teach the audience you described? Look at it critically and make sure you haven’t bitten off more than you can choose.
• What You’ll Learn : Next write a couple of sentences about what people will learn. This will end up being the heart of your abstract, and it’s what people really want to know about whether or not they should be in your session. Target your “What you will learn” sentences to the audience you described, and plug in the concepts from your outline. Example pattern: “In this session, you will learn how to ____, ___, and ___.”
• Opener : Next add an opening statement that calls to the target audience. An example: “Every developer needs to know how to ____.” Or “You’re a SQL Server DBA with 3 years of experience, but ___ still mystifies you.”
• Personalize (optional):  personalize the abstract with a reference to your name. I personally think that the abstract sounds just plain friendlier when it’s written this way: “In this session, Kendra will show you why…”  It lets the audience know they’ve got a person there, not a faceless robot! However, if you’re submitting to a conference that does blind review (such as the SQLPASS Summit ), this may not win you any friends. Check with the conference organizers if you’re not sure.
• Title!  Whee, you’re almost done! At this point it starts getting kinda fun. Brainstorm your title. I always write a few iterations, some more playful than others, and then pick my favorite.
• Review it Yourself: Check your abstract for length. Possibly add a “call to action” closing sentence like, “If you’re a developer with ___ years of experience, this session is for you.” But if your abstract has already called clearly to your audience, you may not need this.
• Get Feedback: Ask a few folks to review title and abstract for you, and tweak based on their feedback.

Step 8 is incredibly valuable, no matter where you are in the process. Try to get feedback from a variety of people, including some who have spoken at the conference(s) you’re planning to submit to. They can help guide you about style and advice specific to those events.

Most Important: Keep on Submitting

Your abstracts may not be accepted the first time you submit. That doesn’t mean they are bad abstracts. It just means you weren’t selected that time.

The most important thing is to not take it personally. Sure, tweak your abstract and session the next time you submit. But this is just because it’s always best to make sure the abstract fits what you’re doing at that point in time and is fresh and relevant to you.

Every conference is an opportunity to share and teach. Have fun rising to it!

Posts or Comics for Your Inbox?

Copyright (c) 2024, Catalyze SQL, LLC; all rights reserved. Content policy: Short excerpts of blog posts (3 sentences) may be republished, but longer excerpts and artwork cannot be shared without explicit permission.

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

Abstract Writing: A Step-by-Step Guide With Tips & Examples

Table of Contents

Introduction

Abstracts of research papers have always played an essential role in describing your research concisely and clearly to researchers and editors of journals, enticing them to continue reading. However, with the widespread availability of scientific databases, the need to write a convincing abstract is more crucial now than during the time of paper-bound manuscripts.

Abstracts serve to "sell" your research and can be compared with your "executive outline" of a resume or, rather, a formal summary of the critical aspects of your work. Also, it can be the "gist" of your study. Since most educational research is done online, it's a sign that you have a shorter time for impressing your readers, and have more competition from other abstracts that are available to be read.

The APCI (Academic Publishing and Conferences International) articulates 12 issues or points considered during the final approval process for conferences & journals and emphasises the importance of writing an abstract that checks all these boxes (12 points). Since it's the only opportunity you have to captivate your readers, you must invest time and effort in creating an abstract that accurately reflects the critical points of your research.

With that in mind, let’s head over to understand and discover the core concept and guidelines to create a substantial abstract. Also, learn how to organise the ideas or plots into an effective abstract that will be awe-inspiring to the readers you want to reach.

What is Abstract? Definition and Overview

The word "Abstract' is derived from Latin abstractus meaning "drawn off." This etymological meaning also applies to art movements as well as music, like abstract expressionism. In this context, it refers to the revealing of the artist's intention.

Based on this, you can determine the meaning of an abstract: A condensed research summary. It must be self-contained and independent of the body of the research. However, it should outline the subject, the strategies used to study the problem, and the methods implemented to attain the outcomes. The specific elements of the study differ based on the area of study; however, together, it must be a succinct summary of the entire research paper.

Abstracts are typically written at the end of the paper, even though it serves as a prologue. In general, the abstract must be in a position to:

• Describe the paper.
• Identify the problem or the issue at hand.
• Explain to the reader the research process, the results you came up with, and what conclusion you've reached using these results.
• Include keywords to guide your strategy and the content.

Furthermore, the abstract you submit should not reflect upon any of  the following elements:

• Examine, analyse or defend the paper or your opinion.
• What you want to study, achieve or discover.
• Be redundant or irrelevant.

After reading an abstract, your audience should understand the reason - what the research was about in the first place, what the study has revealed and how it can be utilised or can be used to benefit others. You can understand the importance of abstract by knowing the fact that the abstract is the most frequently read portion of any research paper. In simpler terms, it should contain all the main points of the research paper.

What is the Purpose of an Abstract?

Abstracts are typically an essential requirement for research papers; however, it's not an obligation to preserve traditional reasons without any purpose. Abstracts allow readers to scan the text to determine whether it is relevant to their research or studies. The abstract allows other researchers to decide if your research paper can provide them with some additional information. A good abstract paves the interest of the audience to pore through your entire paper to find the content or context they're searching for.

Abstract writing is essential for indexing, as well. The Digital Repository of academic papers makes use of abstracts to index the entire content of academic research papers. Like meta descriptions in the regular Google outcomes, abstracts must include keywords that help researchers locate what they seek.

Types of Abstract

Informative and Descriptive are two kinds of abstracts often used in scientific writing.

A descriptive abstract gives readers an outline of the author's main points in their study. The reader can determine if they want to stick to the research work, based on their interest in the topic. An abstract that is descriptive is similar to the contents table of books, however, the format of an abstract depicts complete sentences encapsulated in one paragraph. It is unfortunate that the abstract can't be used as a substitute for reading a piece of writing because it's just an overview, which omits readers from getting an entire view. Also, it cannot be a way to fill in the gaps the reader may have after reading this kind of abstract since it does not contain crucial information needed to evaluate the article.

To conclude, a descriptive abstract is:

• A simple summary of the task, just summarises the work, but some researchers think it is much more of an outline
• Typically, the length is approximately 100 words. It is too short when compared to an informative abstract.
• A brief explanation but doesn't provide the reader with the complete information they need;
• An overview that omits conclusions and results

An informative abstract is a comprehensive outline of the research. There are times when people rely on the abstract as an information source. And the reason is why it is crucial to provide entire data of particular research. A well-written, informative abstract could be a good substitute for the remainder of the paper on its own.

A well-written abstract typically follows a particular style. The author begins by providing the identifying information, backed by citations and other identifiers of the papers. Then, the major elements are summarised to make the reader aware of the study. It is followed by the methodology and all-important findings from the study. The conclusion then presents study results and ends the abstract with a comprehensive summary.

In a nutshell, an informative abstract:

• Has a length that can vary, based on the subject, but is not longer than 300 words.
• Contains all the content-like methods and intentions
• Offers evidence and possible recommendations.

Informative Abstracts are more frequent than descriptive abstracts because of their extensive content and linkage to the topic specifically. You should select different types of abstracts to papers based on their length: informative abstracts for extended and more complex abstracts and descriptive ones for simpler and shorter research papers.

What are the Characteristics of a Good Abstract?

• A good abstract clearly defines the goals and purposes of the study.
• It should clearly describe the research methodology with a primary focus on data gathering, processing, and subsequent analysis.
• A good abstract should provide specific research findings.
• It presents the principal conclusions of the systematic study.
• It should be concise, clear, and relevant to the field of study.
• A well-designed abstract should be unifying and coherent.
• It is easy to grasp and free of technical jargon.
• It is written impartially and objectively.

What are the various sections of an ideal Abstract?

By now, you must have gained some concrete idea of the essential elements that your abstract needs to convey . Accordingly, the information is broken down into six key sections of the abstract, which include:

An Introduction or Background

Research methodology, objectives and goals, limitations.

Let's go over them in detail.

The introduction, also known as background, is the most concise part of your abstract. Ideally, it comprises a couple of sentences. Some researchers only write one sentence to introduce their abstract. The idea behind this is to guide readers through the key factors that led to your study.

It's understandable that this information might seem difficult to explain in a couple of sentences. For example, think about the following two questions like the background of your study:

• What is currently available about the subject with respect to the paper being discussed?
• What isn't understood about this issue? (This is the subject of your research)

While writing the abstract’s introduction, make sure that it is not lengthy. Because if it crosses the word limit, it may eat up the words meant to be used for providing other key information.

Research methodology is where you describe the theories and techniques you used in your research. It is recommended that you describe what you have done and the method you used to get your thorough investigation results. Certainly, it is the second-longest paragraph in the abstract.

In the research methodology section, it is essential to mention the kind of research you conducted; for instance, qualitative research or quantitative research (this will guide your research methodology too) . If you've conducted quantitative research, your abstract should contain information like the sample size, data collection method, sampling techniques, and duration of the study. Likewise, your abstract should reflect observational data, opinions, questionnaires (especially the non-numerical data) if you work on qualitative research.

The research objectives and goals speak about what you intend to accomplish with your research. The majority of research projects focus on the long-term effects of a project, and the goals focus on the immediate, short-term outcomes of the research. It is possible to summarise both in just multiple sentences.

In stating your objectives and goals, you give readers a picture of the scope of the study, its depth and the direction your research ultimately follows. Your readers can evaluate the results of your research against the goals and stated objectives to determine if you have achieved the goal of your research.

In the end, your readers are more attracted by the results you've obtained through your study. Therefore, you must take the time to explain each relevant result and explain how they impact your research. The results section exists as the longest in your abstract, and nothing should diminish its reach or quality.

One of the most important things you should adhere to is to spell out details and figures on the results of your research.

Instead of making a vague assertion such as, "We noticed that response rates varied greatly between respondents with high incomes and those with low incomes", Try these: "The response rate was higher for high-income respondents than those with lower incomes (59 30 percent vs. 30 percent in both cases; P<0.01)."

You're likely to encounter certain obstacles during your research. It could have been during data collection or even during conducting the sample . Whatever the issue, it's essential to inform your readers about them and their effects on the research.

Research limitations offer an opportunity to suggest further and deep research. If, for instance, you were forced to change for convenient sampling and snowball samples because of difficulties in reaching well-suited research participants, then you should mention this reason when you write your research abstract. In addition, a lack of prior studies on the subject could hinder your research.

Your conclusion should include the same number of sentences to wrap the abstract as the introduction. The majority of researchers offer an idea of the consequences of their research in this case.

Your conclusion should include three essential components:

• A significant take-home message.
• Corresponding important findings.
• The Interpretation.

Even though the conclusion of your abstract needs to be brief, it can have an enormous influence on the way that readers view your research. Therefore, make use of this section to reinforce the central message from your research. Be sure that your statements reflect the actual results and the methods you used to conduct your research.

Good Abstract Examples

Abstract example #1.

Children’s consumption behavior in response to food product placements in movies.

The abstract:

"Almost all research into the effects of brand placements on children has focused on the brand's attitudes or behavior intentions. Based on the significant differences between attitudes and behavioral intentions on one hand and actual behavior on the other hand, this study examines the impact of placements by brands on children's eating habits. Children aged 6-14 years old were shown an excerpt from the popular film Alvin and the Chipmunks and were shown places for the item Cheese Balls. Three different versions were developed with no placements, one with moderately frequent placements and the third with the highest frequency of placement. The results revealed that exposure to high-frequency places had a profound effect on snack consumption, however, there was no impact on consumer attitudes towards brands or products. The effects were not dependent on the age of the children. These findings are of major importance to researchers studying consumer behavior as well as nutrition experts as well as policy regulators."

Abstract Example #2

Social comparisons on social media: The impact of Facebook on young women’s body image concerns and mood. The abstract:

"The research conducted in this study investigated the effects of Facebook use on women's moods and body image if the effects are different from an internet-based fashion journal and if the appearance comparison tendencies moderate one or more of these effects. Participants who were female ( N = 112) were randomly allocated to spend 10 minutes exploring their Facebook account or a magazine's website or an appearance neutral control website prior to completing state assessments of body dissatisfaction, mood, and differences in appearance (weight-related and facial hair, face, and skin). Participants also completed a test of the tendency to compare appearances. The participants who used Facebook were reported to be more depressed than those who stayed on the control site. In addition, women who have the tendency to compare appearances reported more facial, hair and skin-related issues following Facebook exposure than when they were exposed to the control site. Due to its popularity it is imperative to conduct more research to understand the effect that Facebook affects the way people view themselves."

Abstract Example #3

The Relationship Between Cell Phone Use and Academic Performance in a Sample of U.S. College Students

"The cellphone is always present on campuses of colleges and is often utilised in situations in which learning takes place. The study examined the connection between the use of cell phones and the actual grades point average (GPA) after adjusting for predictors that are known to be a factor. In the end 536 students in the undergraduate program from 82 self-reported majors of an enormous, public institution were studied. Hierarchical analysis ( R 2 = .449) showed that use of mobile phones is significantly ( p < .001) and negative (b equal to -.164) connected to the actual college GPA, after taking into account factors such as demographics, self-efficacy in self-regulated learning, self-efficacy to improve academic performance, and the actual high school GPA that were all important predictors ( p < .05). Therefore, after adjusting for other known predictors increasing cell phone usage was associated with lower academic performance. While more research is required to determine the mechanisms behind these results, they suggest the need to educate teachers and students to the possible academic risks that are associated with high-frequency mobile phone usage."

Quick tips on writing a good abstract

There exists a common dilemma among early age researchers whether to write the abstract at first or last? However, it's recommended to compose your abstract when you've completed the research since you'll have all the information to give to your readers. You can, however, write a draft at the beginning of your research and add in any gaps later.

If you find abstract writing a herculean task, here are the few tips to help you with it:

1. Always develop a framework to support your abstract

Before writing, ensure you create a clear outline for your abstract. Divide it into sections and draw the primary and supporting elements in each one. You can include keywords and a few sentences that convey the essence of your message.

2. Review Other Abstracts

Abstracts are among the most frequently used research documents, and thousands of them were written in the past. Therefore, prior to writing yours, take a look at some examples from other abstracts. There are plenty of examples of abstracts for dissertations in the dissertation and thesis databases.

3. Avoid Jargon To the Maximum

When you write your abstract, focus on simplicity over formality. You should  write in simple language, and avoid excessive filler words or ambiguous sentences. Keep in mind that your abstract must be readable to those who aren't acquainted with your subject.

4. Focus on Your Research

It's a given fact that the abstract you write should be about your research and the findings you've made. It is not the right time to mention secondary and primary data sources unless it's absolutely required.

Conclusion: How to Structure an Interesting Abstract?

Abstracts are a short outline of your essay. However, it's among the most important, if not the most important. The process of writing an abstract is not straightforward. A few early-age researchers tend to begin by writing it, thinking they are doing it to "tease" the next step (the document itself). However, it is better to treat it as a spoiler.

The simple, concise style of the abstract lends itself to a well-written and well-investigated study. If your research paper doesn't provide definitive results, or the goal of your research is questioned, so will the abstract. Thus, only write your abstract after witnessing your findings and put your findings in the context of a larger scenario.

The process of writing an abstract can be daunting, but with these guidelines, you will succeed. The most efficient method of writing an excellent abstract is to centre the primary points of your abstract, including the research question and goals methods, as well as key results.

Interested in learning more about dedicated research solutions? Go to the SciSpace product page to find out how our suite of products can help you simplify your research workflows so you can focus on advancing science.

The best-in-class solution is equipped with features such as literature search and discovery, profile management, research writing and formatting, and so much more.

But before you go,

You might also like.

Consensus GPT vs. SciSpace GPT: Choose the Best GPT for Research

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

Types of Essays in Academic Writing - Quick Guide (2024)

In order to continue enjoying our site, we ask that you confirm your identity as a human. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

How to write a killer abstract in 10 sentences

The experiments were carefully designed. The data have been meticulously collected. The figures have been expertly prepared. The results are beautiful! All that stands between you and presenting your science at the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 2022 annual meeting is writing an abstract. But where do you begin? How do you write an abstract that will get your science noticed? 

Each day, we are bombarded with a deluge of information, each item vying for our attention. We rely on eye-catching headlines to draw us toward the content that might enrich our lives. In the scientific arena, we rely on abstracts to provide snapshots of studies that may be relevant to us. Abstracts are a crucial filter that helps us to gauge quickly which reports must go to the top of our to-read list. 

Previously, I’ve written how to present a killer research seminar by pretending you are serving the audience a three-course meal at a mystery dinner theater. The appetizer introduces the scientific puzzle as a mystery. The main course is composed of the experiments that uncovered clues. The dessert course satisfies the audience by revealing how the clues addressed the mystery.

Below, I outline how this formula can be adapted to craft an irresistible abstract that will make people hungry to see more of your work. 

Sentences 1-2. Set the stage.

The beginning of a killer abstract must convey the scientific question that keeps you up at night and why. Use the first couple of sentences to describe succinctly the most salient features of the phenomenon you are investigating and, if applicable, how it is relevant to a medical or environmental problem. The stage you set should draw attention to a gap in our knowledge that you are attempting to fill. 

Sentence 3. State the mystery.

The next sentence is a clear and focused hypothesis framed as a question — this represents the mystery your study aims to solve. It should be an interesting and intuitive question derived from the background information in your introductory sentences. If the reader cannot guess your hypothesis after reading that introduction, you haven’t set the stage well enough.

Sentences 4-8. Describe your detective work.

This section is the heart of the experimental effort you used to gather clues relating to the mystery. Explain the case as Sherlock would to Watson, concisely mentioning the rationale and techniques used to unearth the clues. 

Like discriminating detectives, scientists demand precision. If you are vague, your poor reader is forced to wonder what you mean. For example, the statement “Transcript levels were greatly altered in the knockout” leaves people with questions: How many transcripts? How were they altered, and by how much? Instead, write, “We determined that 75% of transcripts increased twofold or more in the knockout.” 

You do not want to disrupt a compelling story by going off on distracting tangents. You need not mention every experiment you completed, only those that provide the most important clues needed to answer the question. 

Sentence 9. Solving the mystery.  

This is the sentence the audience has been waiting for, but if you’ve laid out the clues adequately, they should be able to deduce the conclusion themselves. This sentence should state clearly how your findings contribute to solving the mystery you posed in the introduction.

It is important to note that you don’t need to solve the mystery completely to make a compelling story. Negative data or replicative studies are vital to the scientific enterprise, providing critical clues for resolving biological questions. 

Sentence 10. So what?  

The final sentence of your abstract should remind the reader why your findings are important — for example, in terms of providing new insights into behavior, mitochondrial function or gene expression. If applicable, mention how these findings may facilitate the development of new therapies for a disease. 

In summary, a killer abstract tells a story by framing your scientific study as a mystery. As with all good stories, you’ll also want to devise an alluring or clever title to capture attention. 

Remember: Conference organizers and participants have many abstracts on their plates. Be sympathetic to their plight and make yours enticing and easy to digest. You can keep it simple by avoiding technical jargon wherever possible, defining esoteric terms that must be used, and eliminating unnecessary words or phrases. Avoid the temptation to add extraneous information or research results that are superfluous to your story.

Finally, take advantage of the many resources available to assist writers. Be sure to use tools for checking spelling and grammar. Make certain that you include relevant keywords in your abstract; many people use them to scan the abstract book. 

And don’t forget the most important resource of all — readers. Don’t submit an abstract before taking it on a few test spins by getting others inside and outside your field to read it. If they are not intrigued, you need to go back to the kitchen and cook up a better dish.

Enjoy reading ASBMB Today?

Become a member to receive the print edition monthly and the digital edition weekly.

Bill Sullivan is a professor at Indiana University School of Medicine and the author of several books.

Related articles

Featured jobs.

from the ASBMB career center

Get the latest from ASBMB Today

Enter your email address, and we’ll send you a weekly email with recent articles, interviews and more.

Latest in Careers

Careers highlights or most popular articles.

Illuminating the path to permanent residency

Two directors of postdoctoral affairs have developed a program to illuminate the hidden curriculum and explain how career and immigration are coupled.

Upcoming opportunities

Save the date for ASBMB conferences on topics such as transcriptional regulation, gene expression, ferroptosis and O-GlcNAcylation! Plus: "Molecular motifs" bio art contest entries due Aug. 1.

Science journalism internships for early career scientists

If you love science but are ready to leave the bench, consider a career in science storytelling.

The visa voyage

International scientists fight through red tape and regulations for a chance to train and work in the U.S.

The best of both worlds

Blake Warner is chief of the Salivary Disorders Unit and the Sjögren's disease clinic at the NIH.

Attend this week's webinar on returning to work after time off for caregiving. Reminder: Submit your "Molecular motifs" art contest entry by Aug. 1!

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

How to write an abstract that will be accepted for presentation at a national meeting

Affiliation.

• 1 Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, 325 Ninth Avenue, Box 359762, Seattle, WA 98104, USA. [email protected]
• PMID: 15447804

Preparation, submission, and presentation of an abstract are important facets of the research process, which benefit the investigator/author in several ways. Writing an abstract consists primarily of answering the questions, "Why did you start?" "What did you do?" "What did you find?" and "What does it mean?" A few practical steps in preparing to write the abstract can facilitate the process. This article discusses those steps and offers suggestions for writing each of an abstract's components (title, author list, introduction, methods, results, and conclusions); considers the advantages and disadvantages of incorporating a table or figure into the abstract; offers several general writing tips; and provides annotated examples of well-prepared abstracts: one from an original study, one from a method/device evaluation, and one from a case report.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Writing good abstracts. Alexandrov AV, Hennerici MG. Alexandrov AV, et al. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2007;23(4):256-9. doi: 10.1159/000098324. Epub 2006 Dec 29. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2007. PMID: 17199082
• Effective use of tables and figures in abstracts, presentations, and papers. Durbin CG Jr. Durbin CG Jr. Respir Care. 2004 Oct;49(10):1233-7. Respir Care. 2004. PMID: 15447809
• Hitting the target! A no tears approach to writing an abstract for a conference presentation. Happell B. Happell B. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2007 Dec;16(6):447-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0349.2007.00501.x. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2007. PMID: 17995516
• Writing a research abstract: eloquence in miniature. Papanas N, Georgiadis GS, Maltezos E, Lazarides MK. Papanas N, et al. Int Angiol. 2012 Jun;31(3):297-302. Int Angiol. 2012. PMID: 22634986 Review.
• A "how-to" guide in preparing abstracts and poster presentations. Boullata JI, Mancuso CE. Boullata JI, et al. Nutr Clin Pract. 2007 Dec;22(6):641-6. doi: 10.1177/0115426507022006641. Nutr Clin Pract. 2007. PMID: 18042952 Review.
• Pursuing Scholarship: Creating Effective Conference Submissions. Culmer N, Drowos J, DeMasi M, Kenyon T, Figueroa E, Pfeifle A, Malaty J, Schneider FD, Hartmark-Hill J. Culmer N, et al. PRiMER. 2024 Feb 19;8:13. doi: 10.22454/PRiMER.2024.345782. eCollection 2024. PRiMER. 2024. PMID: 38406237 Free PMC article.
• Longitudinal qualitative study of paired mentor-mentee perspectives on the abstract submission process. Mancuso CA, Robbins L, Paget SA. Mancuso CA, et al. BMC Med Educ. 2023 Nov 23;23(1):898. doi: 10.1186/s12909-023-04869-y. BMC Med Educ. 2023. PMID: 37996820 Free PMC article.
• How to Write an Abstract for Presentation at a Scientific Meeting. Miller AG. Miller AG. Respir Care. 2023 Nov;68(11):1569-1575. doi: 10.4187/respcare.11101. Epub 2023 May 16. Respir Care. 2023. PMID: 37193598
• Reporting in the abstracts presented at the 5th AfriNEAD (African Network for Evidence-to-Action in Disability) Conference in Ghana. Badu E, Okyere P, Bell D, Gyamfi N, Opoku MP, Agyei-Baffour P, Edusei AK. Badu E, et al. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019 Jan 16;4:1. doi: 10.1186/s41073-018-0061-3. eCollection 2019. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019. PMID: 30680228 Free PMC article. Review.
• Writing abstracts and developing posters for national meetings. Wood GJ, Morrison RS. Wood GJ, et al. J Palliat Med. 2011 Mar;14(3):353-9. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2010.0171. Epub 2011 Jan 17. J Palliat Med. 2011. PMID: 21241194 Free PMC article.
• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• How to Write an Abstract | Steps & Examples

How to Write an Abstract | Steps & Examples

Published on February 28, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on July 18, 2023 by Eoghan Ryan.

An abstract is a short summary of a longer work (such as a thesis ,  dissertation or research paper ). The abstract concisely reports the aims and outcomes of your research, so that readers know exactly what your paper is about.

Although the structure may vary slightly depending on your discipline, your abstract should describe the purpose of your work, the methods you’ve used, and the conclusions you’ve drawn.

One common way to structure your abstract is to use the IMRaD structure. This stands for:

• Introduction

Abstracts are usually around 100–300 words, but there’s often a strict word limit, so make sure to check the relevant requirements.

In a dissertation or thesis , include the abstract on a separate page, after the title page and acknowledgements but before the table of contents .

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Abstract example, when to write an abstract, step 1: introduction, step 2: methods, step 3: results, step 4: discussion, tips for writing an abstract, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about abstracts.

Hover over the different parts of the abstract to see how it is constructed.

This paper examines the role of silent movies as a mode of shared experience in the US during the early twentieth century. At this time, high immigration rates resulted in a significant percentage of non-English-speaking citizens. These immigrants faced numerous economic and social obstacles, including exclusion from public entertainment and modes of discourse (newspapers, theater, radio).

Incorporating evidence from reviews, personal correspondence, and diaries, this study demonstrates that silent films were an affordable and inclusive source of entertainment. It argues for the accessible economic and representational nature of early cinema. These concerns are particularly evident in the low price of admission and in the democratic nature of the actors’ exaggerated gestures, which allowed the plots and action to be easily grasped by a diverse audience despite language barriers.

Keywords: silent movies, immigration, public discourse, entertainment, early cinema, language barriers.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

You will almost always have to include an abstract when:

• Completing a thesis or dissertation
• Submitting a research paper to an academic journal
• Writing a book or research proposal
• Applying for research grants

It’s easiest to write your abstract last, right before the proofreading stage, because it’s a summary of the work you’ve already done. Your abstract should:

• Be a self-contained text, not an excerpt from your paper
• Be fully understandable on its own
• Reflect the structure of your larger work

Start by clearly defining the purpose of your research. What practical or theoretical problem does the research respond to, or what research question did you aim to answer?

You can include some brief context on the social or academic relevance of your dissertation topic , but don’t go into detailed background information. If your abstract uses specialized terms that would be unfamiliar to the average academic reader or that have various different meanings, give a concise definition.

After identifying the problem, state the objective of your research. Use verbs like “investigate,” “test,” “analyze,” or “evaluate” to describe exactly what you set out to do.

This part of the abstract can be written in the present or past simple tense  but should never refer to the future, as the research is already complete.

• This study will investigate the relationship between coffee consumption and productivity.
• This study investigates the relationship between coffee consumption and productivity.

Next, indicate the research methods that you used to answer your question. This part should be a straightforward description of what you did in one or two sentences. It is usually written in the past simple tense, as it refers to completed actions.

• Structured interviews will be conducted with 25 participants.
• Structured interviews were conducted with 25 participants.

Don’t evaluate validity or obstacles here — the goal is not to give an account of the methodology’s strengths and weaknesses, but to give the reader a quick insight into the overall approach and procedures you used.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Next, summarize the main research results . This part of the abstract can be in the present or past simple tense.

• Our analysis has shown a strong correlation between coffee consumption and productivity.
• Our analysis shows a strong correlation between coffee consumption and productivity.
• Our analysis showed a strong correlation between coffee consumption and productivity.

Depending on how long and complex your research is, you may not be able to include all results here. Try to highlight only the most important findings that will allow the reader to understand your conclusions.

Finally, you should discuss the main conclusions of your research : what is your answer to the problem or question? The reader should finish with a clear understanding of the central point that your research has proved or argued. Conclusions are usually written in the present simple tense.

• We concluded that coffee consumption increases productivity.
• We conclude that coffee consumption increases productivity.

If there are important limitations to your research (for example, related to your sample size or methods), you should mention them briefly in the abstract. This allows the reader to accurately assess the credibility and generalizability of your research.

If your aim was to solve a practical problem, your discussion might include recommendations for implementation. If relevant, you can briefly make suggestions for further research.

If your paper will be published, you might have to add a list of keywords at the end of the abstract. These keywords should reference the most important elements of the research to help potential readers find your paper during their own literature searches.

Be aware that some publication manuals, such as APA Style , have specific formatting requirements for these keywords.

It can be a real challenge to condense your whole work into just a couple of hundred words, but the abstract will be the first (and sometimes only) part that people read, so it’s important to get it right. These strategies can help you get started.

Read other abstracts

The best way to learn the conventions of writing an abstract in your discipline is to read other people’s. You probably already read lots of journal article abstracts while conducting your literature review —try using them as a framework for structure and style.

You can also find lots of dissertation abstract examples in thesis and dissertation databases .

Reverse outline

Not all abstracts will contain precisely the same elements. For longer works, you can write your abstract through a process of reverse outlining.

For each chapter or section, list keywords and draft one to two sentences that summarize the central point or argument. This will give you a framework of your abstract’s structure. Next, revise the sentences to make connections and show how the argument develops.

Write clearly and concisely

A good abstract is short but impactful, so make sure every word counts. Each sentence should clearly communicate one main point.

To keep your abstract or summary short and clear:

• Avoid passive sentences: Passive constructions are often unnecessarily long. You can easily make them shorter and clearer by using the active voice.
• Avoid long sentences: Substitute longer expressions for concise expressions or single words (e.g., “In order to” for “To”).
• Avoid obscure jargon: The abstract should be understandable to readers who are not familiar with your topic.
• Avoid repetition and filler words: Replace nouns with pronouns when possible and eliminate unnecessary words.
• Avoid detailed descriptions: An abstract is not expected to provide detailed definitions, background information, or discussions of other scholars’ work. Instead, include this information in the body of your thesis or paper.

If you’re struggling to edit down to the required length, you can get help from expert editors with Scribbr’s professional proofreading services or use the paraphrasing tool .

Check your formatting

If you are writing a thesis or dissertation or submitting to a journal, there are often specific formatting requirements for the abstract—make sure to check the guidelines and format your work correctly. For APA research papers you can follow the APA abstract format .

Checklist: Abstract

The word count is within the required length, or a maximum of one page.

The abstract appears after the title page and acknowledgements and before the table of contents .

I have clearly stated my research problem and objectives.

I have briefly described my methodology .

I have summarized the most important results .

I have stated my main conclusions .

I have mentioned any important limitations and recommendations.

The abstract can be understood by someone without prior knowledge of the topic.

You've written a great abstract! Use the other checklists to continue improving your thesis or dissertation.

If you want to know more about AI for academic writing, AI tools, or research bias, make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

Research bias

• Anchoring bias
• Halo effect
• The Baader–Meinhof phenomenon
• The placebo effect
• Nonresponse bias
• Deep learning
• Generative AI
• Machine learning
• Reinforcement learning
• Supervised vs. unsupervised learning

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

An abstract is a concise summary of an academic text (such as a journal article or dissertation ). It serves two main purposes:

• To help potential readers determine the relevance of your paper for their own research.
• To communicate your key findings to those who don’t have time to read the whole paper.

Abstracts are often indexed along with keywords on academic databases, so they make your work more easily findable. Since the abstract is the first thing any reader sees, it’s important that it clearly and accurately summarizes the contents of your paper.

An abstract for a thesis or dissertation is usually around 200–300 words. There’s often a strict word limit, so make sure to check your university’s requirements.

The abstract is the very last thing you write. You should only write it after your research is complete, so that you can accurately summarize the entirety of your thesis , dissertation or research paper .

Avoid citing sources in your abstract . There are two reasons for this:

• The abstract should focus on your original research, not on the work of others.
• The abstract should be self-contained and fully understandable without reference to other sources.

There are some circumstances where you might need to mention other sources in an abstract: for example, if your research responds directly to another study or focuses on the work of a single theorist. In general, though, don’t include citations unless absolutely necessary.

The abstract appears on its own page in the thesis or dissertation , after the title page and acknowledgements but before the table of contents .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, July 18). How to Write an Abstract | Steps & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved July 30, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/abstract/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a thesis or dissertation introduction, shorten your abstract or summary, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, what is your plagiarism score.

Jae DiBello Takeuchi Research & Teaching Projects

• Sep 26, 2023

How to write a 300-word conference presentation abstract

Updated: Nov 8, 2023

I recently participated in a workshop for graduate students preparing abstract proposals for

the 2024 ICJLE (International Conference on Japanese Language Education) conference . During the workshop, I shared some tips that I use when I write abstracts, so I thought it might be helpful to post them here. Note that I’m assuming you have already settled on the topic and the project is underway. If that’s not the case… well, that’s a topic for another blog.

Don’t start by planning to write 300 words. Your goal should not be “write 300 words.” If it is, and you stop at 300 words, or hastily wrap up when you get to that length, you may stop before you’ve included all the necessary elements. Or worse, you may stop writing before you’ve articulated your presentation’s conclusions or contributions.

Although it’s common to think about writing in terms of length, it’s important to ensure that you write through all your key ideas. Have you ever heard the expression “writing is thinking”? This is the idea that writing is not figuring out everything we’re going to say in our heads, and then writing down a bunch of fully formed thoughts. Instead, it is in the act of writing that we figure out what it is we want to say. As Steven Mintz observed, “writing is not simply a matter of expressing pre-existing thoughts clearly. It’s the process through which ideas are produced and refined.”

In drafting your abstract, use the act of writing to articulate and refine your ideas. Write an outline . A good place to start is with a basic outline, which might include: introduction and background, description of the study, preliminary findings, conclusion, and contributions. Now, instead of writing 300 words, your goal becomes writing a few sentences or a short paragraph for each section in the outline.

If you find that you can’t write at least a sentence or two for each section, that means you still have some work to do before you’ll be ready to write the abstract. Maybe you need to do a little more work on previous research literature before you can write the background or contributions. Or perhaps you need to revisit your analysis before you can articulate the preliminary findings. Writing through the outline will help you find these missing pieces.

After you finish writing through each section of the outline, you will have a rough draft of your abstract. Maybe it’s 400 words, or maybe closer to 500 words, that’s ok. This step will help you complete the crucial task of articulating your ideas.

Revisit the evaluation criteria . Before you start editing, take some time to think about how your abstract will be evaluated. Return to the Call for Proposals and see if the evaluation criteria are specified. If so, evaluate your abstract based on that. Read as if you were a reviewer and see how well your draft aligns with the criteria. If the criteria are not listed in the CfP, re-read the conference description, and use this information to review your draft description. It’s safe to assume that abstracts will be evaluated based on how clearly they explain the topic, background, study details (data, methodology), conclusions or findings, and contributions. If this list looks a lot like the outline you wrote in the step above, you’re doing it right!

As you read your draft, ask yourself which sections are unclear, for example, from the perspective of someone who hasn’t read the same research articles you’ve read. Maybe you need to add some definitional information, or there are details missing from the description of your study. As you read, ask yourself “so what? Why does this matter?” If the answer isn’t clear from the information you’ve provided, you need to address that. As you go through this process, you may find you’re adding more to address these missing pieces. Again, that’s ok. Right now, you want to make sure your abstract has all the details it needs to have.

Edit and Cut. Now it’s time to start looking at that word count! If you have 400 words or less, careful editing should easily get you down closer to 300. But if you have 500 words or more, you are going to need to remove entire sentences or whole sections. First, look for redundancy. You may be surprised to find that you’re saying the same thing twice in two different sections – for example, in the introduction and the conclusion. In a 150-page book, repeating something from the introduction when you write the conclusion is ok, since the reader may have forgotten some early details by the time they get to the end. But such repetition isn’t necessary in a 300-word abstract. So identify spots where you are repeating yourself, and start your cutting there.

Next, look for details that aren’t needed for the abstract, and keep only those that are necessary to help the reader understand your project and where it fits in your field. For example, do you have a lot of information in the background section? A lot of literature review details and multiple citations? That’s a good place to start cutting or collapsing. Do you have more details about the study than are needed in an abstract? Cut that, too.

Another detail to pay attention to at this stage is the structure and order in which you introduce ideas. Experiment with moving sentences around to see if there’s a more effective way to present your topic. Check to see if something you have in the conclusion section might actually work better in the introduction section.

While you’re doing all this cutting, be sure to keep earlier drafts and save any of the language you’re cutting. You may find it useful later, for your presentation or an article write-up.

At this point, if you’re still struggling to get the word count down, move on to the next step!

Put it aside before editing again . This step is essential, so be sure to give yourself enough time before the submission deadline. Put your abstract aside and work on something else. You can work on the project or the presentation, but don’t work on the abstract. Come back to it, in a few days or, ideally, in a week. After some time away, return to your abstract and re-read it with fresh eyes. Focus on clarity, structure, and coherence. If it was still too long when you set it aside, this break should help you spot more places to cut.

Polish and submit . At this point, you should have a more refined and concise presentation of your ideas than when you started. If you have time to get feedback from a friend or mentor, great! But if not, the steps I’ve outlined here will have helped you come up with a solid abstract that demonstrates to the reader what your project is and how it will contribute to the conference.

Now submit your abstract and get started on prepping the actual presentation!

• Publications & Writing

Recent Posts

Introducing my book on Native Speaker Bias in Japan

How to Write a Conference Abstract

• Finding Conferences
• Abstract Preparation
• How to Write a Scientific or Research Abstract

What is a Case Report Abstract?

Author information, writing a title, introduction, case presentation.

• How to Write a Quality Improvement Project Abstract
• Writing Tips
• Reasons for Rejection

Medical and clinical case reports (or “clinical vignettes”) are integral in recording unusual and rare cases of diseases, disorders, and injuries. They provide not only the details of a given case, but also briefly include background and establish the wider significance of a case in the medical literature.

• You should aim for completeness; Use full names and formal credentials; department and institution worked. The author information usually does NOT count against the total word count but be sure you check the instructions.
• There may be a limit on how many authors can be on the submission.
• The first author is the one who conceived the study and did most of the work; will be the person who presents. Sometimes you have to be a member of an association to submit an abstract, so check for those rules as well.
• Full disclosure on sponsors.
• Check how your abstract is being reviewed. Is it blind? You may see instructions like, To ensure blinded peer-review, no direct references to the author(s) or institution(s) of origin should be made anywhere in the title, body, tables or figures.

Your best strategy in writing a title: Write the abstract first.  Then pull out 6-10 key words or key phrases found in the abstract, and string them together into various titles. Brainstorm lots of keywords to help find the best mix.

• Ideally 10-12 words long
• Title should highlight the case​
• Avoid low-impact phrases like ‘effect of... ‘ or ‘influence of…’; Do not include jargon or unfamiliar acronyms
• 2-4 sentences long
• Give clinical context
• Explain the relevance or importance of this case.  Describe whether the case is unique. If not, does the case have an​ unusual diagnosis, prognosis, therapy or harm? Is the case an unusual presentation of a common condition? Or an unusual complication of a disease or management?​
• Describe the instructive or teaching points that add value to this case. Does it demonstrate a cost-effective approach to management or​alternative diagnostic/treatment strategy? Does it increase awareness of a rare condition? 
• 8-10 sentences long
• Use standard presentation format
• Present the information chronologically​
• Patient history; physical examination; investigations tried; clinical course
• Describe the history, examination and investigations adequately. Is the cause of the patient's illness clear-cut? What are other plausible explanations?​
• Describe the treatments adequately. Have all available therapeutic options been considered? Are outcomes related to treatments? Include the patient’s progress and outcome
• 3-4 sentences long
• ​Review the uniqueness of this case. Explain the rationale for reporting the case. What is unusual about the case? Does it challenge prevailing wisdom?​
• Review any relevant literature. Describe how this case is different from those previously reported​
• Impart any lessons learned. In the future, could things be done differently in a similar case
• Case report abstract example
• << Previous: How to Write a Scientific or Research Abstract
• Next: How to Write a Quality Improvement Project Abstract >>
• Last Updated: Feb 14, 2024 8:15 AM
• URL: https://guides.temple.edu/howtowriteaconferenceabstract

Temple University

University libraries.

See all library locations

• Library Directory
• Locations and Directions
• Frequently Called Numbers

Need help? Email us at [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Proc Biol Sci
• v.291(2027); 2024 Jul
• PMC11288685

Title, abstract and keywords: a practical guide to maximize the visibility and impact of academic papers

Patrice pottier.

1 Evolution & Ecology Research Centre, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

2 Division of Ecology and Evolution, Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

Malgorzata Lagisz

3 Theoretical Sciences Visiting Program, Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, Onna 904-0495, Japan

Samantha Burke

Szymon m. drobniak.

4 Institute of Environmental Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland

Philip A. Downing

5 Ecology and Genetics Research Unit, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland

Erin L. Macartney

6 School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

April Robin Martinig

Ayumi mizuno.

7 Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-0810, Japan

Kyle Morrison

Pietro pollo, lorenzo ricolfi.

8 Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biology, Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Coralie Williams

Yefeng yang, shinichi nakagawa, associated data.

Data, code and additional materials are available [ 65 ] and are archived permanently in Zenodo [ 66 ].

Supplementary material is available online [ 67 ].

In a growing digital landscape, enhancing the discoverability and resonance of scientific articles is essential. Here, we offer 10 recommendations to amplify the discoverability of studies in search engines and databases. Particularly, we argue that the strategic use and placement of key terms in the title, abstract and keyword sections can boost indexing and appeal. By surveying 230 journals in ecology and evolutionary biology, we found that current author guidelines may unintentionally limit article findability. Our survey of 5323 studies revealed that authors frequently exhaust abstract word limits—particularly those capped under 250 words. This suggests that current guidelines may be overly restrictive and not optimized to increase the dissemination and discoverability of digital publications. Additionally, 92% of studies used redundant keywords in the title or abstract, undermining optimal indexing in databases. We encourage adopting structured abstracts to maximize the incorporation of key terms in titles, abstracts and keywords. In addition, we encourage the relaxation of abstract and keyword limitations in journals with strict guidelines, and the inclusion of multilingual abstracts to broaden global accessibility. These recommendations to editors are designed to improve article engagement and facilitate evidence synthesis, thereby aligning scientific publishing with the modern needs of academic research.

1.  Introduction

Scientific articles serve as the primary method for disseminating research findings. Between 1980 and 2012, global scientific output was estimated to increase by 8–9% every year, implying a doubling of scientific evidence approximately every 9 years [ 1 ]. Amid this burgeoning landscape, standing out becomes a research agenda in its own right. Ensuring that articles are well written and indexed in databases such as Scopus or Web of Science is akin to laying the first bricks in the foundation—it is important for discoverability, but not sufficient. Many articles, despite being indexed, remain undiscovered (coined the ‘discoverability crisis’ [ 2 ]). We argue that carefully crafting titles, abstracts and keywords is a critical step to increase the visibility and impact of scientific research.

Titles, abstracts and keywords are the primary marketing components of any scientific paper, and carefully designing these elements is crucial [ 3 , 4 ]. However, studies with appealing abstracts will not necessarily be discovered and cited because of a lack of search engine optimization [ 5 ]. Search engine optimization is the process of enhancing the findability of content by search engines. While often not discussed in the academic sphere, it is particularly relevant for scientific articles. To discover articles, academics often use a combination of key terms in scientific literature databases or search engines, and most databases leverage algorithms to scan the words in titles, abstracts and keywords to find matches. Failure to incorporate appropriate terminology could thus undermine readership. Other search engines such as Google Scholar may look through articles in their entirety [ 6 ]. Academics may also use other pathways to discover scientific articles, such as recommendations from colleagues or suggested content on social media. However, the same underlying principle remains—the absence of critical key terms means these articles would not surface in your search results, or those of your colleagues. Social media is also likely to recommend content that is most engaged by the user, and studies with inappropriate key terms may not appear as suggested content. Notably, keywords play an important role in the search ranking process. Choosing well-suited terms can often mean the difference between a study appearing at the top of the search results or being buried beneath a virtual pile of other documents. This is particularly important for databases that sort results by relevance, where the strategic use of keywords can significantly enhance an article’s visibility. Although the functioning of most relevance ranking algorithms is not publicly disclosed [ 7 ], it is reasonable to expect that articles containing search terms in the title or abstract will be ranked higher than other articles not containing these terms, or in more cryptic parts of the manuscript (e.g. in the methods). Additionally, not including relevant keywords impedes a study’s inclusion in literature reviews and meta-analyses, which often rely on database searches based on key terms in titles, abstracts and keywords [ 8 , 9 ].

Enhancing study discoverability is, however, ineffective if the abstract and title fail to engage the reader. Readers typically gauge the relevance of a study by briefly scanning the title and abstract. If these lack essential keywords or are mired in uncommon jargon, they may not capture the reader’s interest. An abstract that is well-structured, accurate, descriptive and written with a narrative can significantly influence whether a study is read thoroughly, sidelined onto a reading backlog, or ignored [ 3 , 4 , 10 – 12 ]. Therefore, the interplay between strategic keyword inclusion and compelling abstract and title composition serves as a bridge between discoverability and engagement, laying the groundwork for academic impact (i.e. whether the study is read, cited and/or used in future works). Although discoverability does not directly imply impact, papers with a larger readership tend to accumulate more citations [ 13 – 15 ] because we cannot cite what we do not discover.

Here, we propose recommendations to maximize the discoverability and impact of scientific articles. First, we offer a practical guide to crafting effective titles, abstracts and keywords for articles to augment their findability in search engines ( figures 1 and ​ and2), 2 ), as well as additional considerations to maximize discoverability. These recommendations were generated through numerous workshops and discussions with the author team. Some recommendations are evidence-based, while others stem from our extensive experience in conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses (mostly in ecology and evolutionary biology), which taught us lessons on maximizing discoverability and impact. Second, we surveyed 230 journals in the fields of ecology and evolutionary biology to evaluate how existing author guidelines may inadvertently hinder article discoverability. Indeed, some of our recommendations may conflict with existing author guidelines set by journals. Evaluating variations in the length and structure of abstracts, titles and keywords can thus highlight if editorial changes are needed to facilitate the adoption of our recommendations. Third, reflecting on our recommendations and literature survey, we suggest a set of recommendations for journal editors that aim to optimize the likelihood of published works being discovered and cited. Ultimately, these recommendations aim to enhance article engagement and facilitate evidence synthesis.

Ten strategic recommendations to improve the discoverability of scientific articles. Some recommendations are specific to a section, while others transcend multiple sections. The number refers to the sections of the guide (see main text).

Example of strategic use of key terms. Above is a hypothetical abstract capped at 120 words that does not follow our recommendations. Below is a longer (250 words) abstract that follows our recommendations for crafting titles, abstracts and keywords. The text highlighted and numbers refer to specific parts of the guide (see main text). While the abstract is strictly structured following IMRAD in this example, the same abstract could be used without section headers for each section for journals not allowing structured abstracts.

(a) A practical guide to crafting titles, abstracts and keywords

(i) choose a unique and descriptive title.

Titles hold a pivotal role in scientific papers. From reviewers to readers, it is the first point of engagement [ 16 ]. It is thus not surprising that article discoverability and engagement can be shaped by the contents of their titles.

The relationship between title length and citation rates is a point of contention. While some studies suggest that shorter titles provide citation advantages [ 17 – 19 ], others find the opposite pattern [ 20 , 21 ] or no relationship [ 22 – 26 ]. Importantly, effects, when detected, are weak or moderate, suggesting that other features of articles may be more important than title length. In the field of ecology and evolutionary biology, titles have been getting longer without much consequence for citation rates [ 24 , 27 ]. However, exceptionally long titles (>20 words) tend to fare poorly during peer review [ 24 ]. For some search engines, lengthy titles may be trimmed owing to space limitations (e.g. when using a mobile device), which may impede discovery [ 5 ]. Therefore, avoiding excessively long titles is likely to be sensible.

The perceived scope of the title also seems to have an influence on a paper’s impact. A narrow-scoped title tends to have negative effects, with papers that include species names in titles receiving significantly fewer citations compared to papers that avoid this practice [ 24 , 25 , 27 ]. This suggests that framing your findings in a broader context can increase your study’s appeal to readers and editors. However, it is important not to inflate the scope of your study so that the title remains accurate, descriptive and informative [ 28 , 29 ] ( figure 2 ). For instance, a study investigating the thermal tolerance of Pogona vitticeps could phrase its title as ‘thermal tolerance of a reptile’ rather than ‘thermal tolerance of reptiles’, the latter implying the study results are applicable to all reptiles.

Humour also appears to play a role in a paper’s future impact. While an earlier study [ 30 ] found this association varied across fields, this analysis did not correct for individual journal properties. Conversely, a recent study discovered that papers with titles that scored the highest for humour had nearly double the citation count as papers that received the lowest scores, even after accounting for self-citation rates [ 27 ]. Incorporating humour might be seen as risky, but this trend could signal a shift in perceptions, where a well-placed pun can enrich academic writing and engage the reader. Humorous titles are also more easily remembered, which may play a role in a study’s future impact [ 27 ]. However, authors should be mindful of accessibility when crafting titles to avoid alienating non-English speakers [ 31 ]. Funny titles often rely on cultural references that are far from universal, thus metaphors should be used with caution [ 32 ].

The art of crafting an engaging title is also complemented by a scientific consideration for accuracy and discoverability. Implementing stylistic structures such as incorporating humour is a progressive step, but attention must also be given to the integration of relevant key terms to accurately describe the content. For instance, humorous parts of the title may be used in conjunction with more descriptive information by separating the title with punctuation (e.g. colon). This way, titles can reach readers who enjoy humorous titles without compromising scientific integrity. A simple search of your title can also ensure the chosen title is distinct from other published articles, reducing the likelihood of your paper being overshadowed in the vast scientific literature.

(ii) Use the most common terminology

The terminology used in a scientific article is not merely descriptive. Key terms can be used strategically to enhance the discoverability of scientific research and their influence extends beyond the keyword section. The more we incorporate key terms or phrases that encapsulate the essence of our research, the more likely our work is to surface in broad database searches [ 5 ]. Emphasizing recognizable key terms, those frequently employed in the related literature, can significantly augment the findability of an article ( figure 2 ). Papers whose abstracts contain more common and frequently used terms also tend to have increased citation rates [ 33 , 34 ]. Importantly, it is preferable to place the most common and important key terms at the beginning of the abstract, as not all search engines display the entire abstract [ 5 ]. It is also important to consider differences between American and British English and using alternative spellings in the keywords section may be a good strategy to increase discoverability (see §1a(iv)).

A systematic approach to choosing key terms or phrases involves scrutinizing similar studies to identify the terminology predominantly used. Lexical resources or linguistic tools (e.g. Thesaurus) that provide variations of essential terms can be beneficial in this process, ensuring that a variety of relevant search terms direct readers to your work. Using tools such as Google Trends can also help identify key terms that are more frequently searched online [ 5 ].

Avoiding ambiguity also plays a crucial role in enhancing discoverability. Precise and familiar terms often outperform their broader or less recognizable counterparts. In fact, using uncommon keywords is negatively correlated with impact [ 35 ]. For example, ‘survival’ conveys a clearer meaning than the more expansive term ‘survivorship’, and ‘bird’ resonates more readily with a broader audience than the specialized term ‘avian’. Papers with these key terms are likely to appear more frequently in literature searches (but see [ 7 ] for a discussion on the consistency of search engines) and hence have the potential to be more impactful.

(iii) Use readable key terms

When crafting your abstract, it is crucial to prioritize the readers’ ability to discover and understand your work. Select key terms or phrases that are likely to appear in search queries, ensuring they are not separated by words or special characters that might hinder discovery [ 5 ] ( figure 2 ). For instance, instead of ‘offspring number and survival’, consider using ‘offspring number and offspring survival’ to align with typical search queries (e.g. ‘offspring survival’). For similar reasons, avoid key terms separated by (suspended) hyphens (e.g. use ‘precopulatory and postcopulatory traits’ instead of ‘pre- and post-copulatory traits’) or containing special characters and symbols, unless they represent the most common terminology. While our minds can connect symbols and hyphenated words to their intended meaning, search engines cannot, unless these are directly specified. In fact, recent meta-analytic evidence shows that complex abstracts with low readability are penalized in terms of citation rates [ 23 ].

Technical jargon is often difficult to circumvent in the methods section but strive to minimize its use in the abstract. When technical terms or acronyms are necessary, choose them thoughtfully to avoid confusion. For example, ‘PCR’ could stand for ‘polymerase chain reaction’ or ‘principal coordinates regression’, potentially confusing a broad readership. In some instances, acronyms are a useful way to reduce word count and make the abstract readable, particularly for key terms that are mostly defined by their acronyms (e.g. per- and polyfluoroakyl substances, PFAS). In such cases, ensure that both the acronym and its definition are in the abstract and keywords, preserving clarity while maximizing discoverability ( figure 2 ).

(iv) Use synonyms between sections

Leveraging synonyms is another tactic to maximize the chances of your article being discovered [ 5 ]. Readers often search for relevant studies using one or a few key terms and may miss relevant studies because these key terms are not present in the title, abstract or keywords. Therefore, including as many key terms as possible across the title, abstract and keywords will maximize the chances of a study being found [ 5 , 36 ]. To do this efficiently, consider all possible synonyms of key terms, using lexical resources or seeking advice from field experts and collaborators. Using text mining from samples of relevant studies is also an efficient way to find additional key terms [ 37 ].

Once your key terms are selected, strategically distribute them across your title, abstract and keywords ( figure 2 ). Preferably, use the most common key terms in the title and abstract, as these are often ranked higher by algorithms organizing search results by relevance [ 5 ]. For readability and clarity, maintain consistent terminology in the abstract itself, but vary verbs and adjectives to keep the writing engaging. Keeping the key terminology consistent preserves the abstract’s clarity while leveraging different synonyms in other sections can enhance discoverability. In fact, evidence shows that articles that distributed key terms between sections had citation advantages [ 26 ]. On the other hand, doubling the frequency of key terms in abstracts increases citation rates by less than one percent [ 33 ]. Interestingly, article citation rates are positively (albeit weakly) related to the number of keywords [ 23 , 35 ], suggesting that distributing synonyms can provide advantages. This underscores the importance of careful keyword selection and placement, turning what might be overlooked as a minor detail into a meaningful opportunity to extend the impact of your work.

(v) Use umbrella terms carefully

As discussed previously, selecting the appropriate terminology in the title, abstract and keywords is essential to accurately represent your study and reach potential readers. This involves carefully considering the use of key terms or phrases that are directly related to your research, as well as umbrella terms that can convey broader context ( figure 2 ). Umbrella terms are broad and general phrases that encompass a wide range of concepts. While they can be useful for situating your study in a larger framework and enhancing discoverability [ 35 ], misuse or over-reliance on these terms can render your paper vague and lead to confusion [ 29 ].

For instance, if your research specifically examines the impact of deforestation on amphibian biodiversity in a particular region, it might be appropriate to mention ‘biodiversity loss’ or ‘environmental degradation’. However, using overly broad terms such as ‘climate change’ without direct relevance could dilute the specificity of your research, distancing it from its core audience. Similarly, using broad terms, such as ‘anthropogenic impacts’, is not optimal if the study is focusing on urban ecology or eutrophication. In navigating umbrella terms, you must strike a delicate balance between providing a broader context and maintaining the specificity of your study. This will ensure that your study will be discovered by a broad audience that includes specialists and researchers from other fields.

(vi) Describe the key aspects of your study

A recommended approach adopted by some ecological and evolutionary biology journals is to structure the abstract using the IMRAD framework (introduction, methods, results, and discussion) or derivatives. While not all journals allow structured abstracts, any abstract can be organized logically. The IMRAD framework facilitates a logical flow of information and ensures that the abstract is a stand-alone summary of the paper. It also ensures that researchers can efficiently locate specific abstract sections and gather the necessary information ( figure 2 ).

Within these abstract sections, key elements should be incorporated to enhance discoverability in online bibliographic databases. These include the taxonomic group, species name, response variable(s), independent variable(s), study area and study type ( figure 2 ). By including these components, the abstract becomes more discoverable to researchers searching for a specific aspect of your study. For example, one may be interested in compiling studies on wing length in tropical birds and may search for the key terms ‘birds’, ‘wing length’ and ‘tropical’. Relevant studies using alternative key terms such as ‘passerines’ instead of ‘birds’, general terms such as ‘body size’ instead of ‘wing length’, or failing to include key terms such as ‘tropical’, may not be found. Optimally, all these keywords should be present to maximize your chances of being discovered.

However, deciding on the level of classification when describing these key sections is not trivial. For instance, taxonomic groups could be divided into formal levels of classification (order, family, genus, etc.), or more colloquially (birds, reptiles and fish). Study areas can also vary in granularity, ranging from the continent level to the local county. We recommend proofreading your abstract with a focus on discoverability. Imagine yourself looking for a similar study and consider what elements of the abstract would facilitate its discovery. You may also search for similar studies or systematic reviews and meta-analyses on related topics. Choosing the right terminology is a compromise between discoverability and specificity, and the choice of these terms should align with the scope and audience of your study.

(vii) State meaningful results

The presentation of results in the abstract is essential as it highlights the study’s central quantitative findings. To effectively communicate these findings, the results should be summarized concisely in one to three clear sentences, emphasizing key points and avoiding complex statistical details that might require specialized knowledge or extensive contextualization. The results should be accessible to a wide audience, especially in ecology and evolutionary biology, where readers have varying backgrounds and expertise levels.

While null hypothesis significance testing results are commonly reported in abstracts, they do not provide information on the magnitude or practical importance of the observed effect [ 38 , 39 ]. Instead, the focus should be on the effect size, a measure that conveys the magnitude, direction and precision of an effect. Effect sizes describe more meaningful information about the biological effect than statistical significance alone [ 40 , 41 ]. Therefore, if you wish to report statistical significance, p -values are preferable to present alongside effect sizes rather than in lieu of them. Unless otherwise stated, it is also often reasonably safe to assume that results presented in the abstract are statistically significant.

Consider, for example, a study on the impact of temperature changes on fish body size. Instead of reporting p -values or model coefficients, it would be more effective to say, ‘We found that a 3°C increase in water temperature led to a 15% (±2% SD) decrease in body length’. This statement conveys the core finding with a focus on the magnitude and direction of the effect, making it more comprehensible to a wide readership without extensive contextualization. In cases where these results are not statistically significant, one may add ‘albeit non statistically significant ’ to provide caution regarding the replicability of the results.

(viii) Write with clarity and a narrative

The quality of an abstract is an important factor in determining the life and legacy of a paper and requires a careful balance of accuracy, clarity and style. Though often overlooked, adding a narrative (i.e. a coherent and logical sequence of information) to your abstract can elevate its appeal. While the content must be scientifically rigorous, a well-phrased abstract can make the reading experience more engaging without sacrificing scholarly value ( figure 2 ). In fact, narratives are inherently persuasive and favour engagement with a broader audience [ 11 ]. By weaving a clear narrative and connecting ideas, you can enhance both the readability and appeal of your work [ 10 – 12 ]. While narrativity is subjective, narrative indicators (i.e. metrics measuring the degree of narrativity) can be used to assess and develop your narrative and are positively correlated with journal impact factors and citation rates [ 10 ].

Importantly, the IMRAD structure often aligns with logical narrative structures. Sequentially stating elements of the introduction, methods, results and discussion can effectively weave a coherent narrative. Consider, for instance, this narrative in seven acts. First, it is important to set the scene with the general research topic or theory investigated (Introduction). Second, we may introduce the conflict, such as an important knowledge gap, or controversies in theory (Introduction). Third, we may introduce the protagonists, the species or taxonomic group used to resolve this conflict (Introduction). Fourth, we may define the quest: the general research objectives (Introduction). Fifth, we may describe the journey by detailing the methodologies employed (Methods). Sixth, we can reveal the discoveries and outline the results of the study (Results). Seventh, we can reflect on this journey, putting the results into the context of the broader literature (Discussion). In this example, using the IMRAD structure (whether the abstract is strictly structured or not) helps describe important aspects of the study, while also weaving a logical narrative.

(ix) Benchmark your draft

Envisioning yourself conducting a literature search can lead you to become a better craftsperson of the discoverability of your own work. A robust strategy to gauge the coverage of your key terms is to compare them with the content of similar studies. To do this, you can use your key terms in database searches (e.g. Web of Science, Scopus or Google Scholar) to inspect their effectiveness in capturing related papers on the subject you are investigating [ 42 ]. Conversely, you can use search terms of existing systematic reviews or meta-analyses relevant to your study topic to ensure that your paper will be retrieved based on your title, abstract and keywords. You can do a similar exercise by attempting to do a comprehensive search of your own to think of distinct terms you can include as keywords. You can also learn from the methods used for conducting systematic searches of literature (e.g. see [ 8 ] for a guide for ecologists and evolutionary biologists)—especially on how search terms are selected, and search strings are composed to find evidence used in meta-analyses and quantitative evidence syntheses. In addition, professional courses or advice from librarians are a great way to gather knowledge on the workings of search engines and systematic review searches. By understanding the strengths and limitations of search engines, you will increase the chances of your scientific contributions being noticed and used to inform policies, practices and scientific progress.

Remember to recognize that key terms contained in your abstract should not be duplicated as keywords. That is because the abstract content is indexed by most databases, meaning that the words in the abstract naturally act as keywords. At this stage, it is valuable to share your abstract and keywords with co-authors to seek their insights. Sharing your draft with someone outside of your field may also help find terms that are overly technical for a broad readership. This collaborative exercise is useful to ensure you use the most relevant key terms, increasing discoverability.

(x) Translate your content

English is considered the lingua franca of scientific research, allowing it to have a global reach. However, not all scientists or readers have a good understanding of English, limiting the accessibility of vital research [ 43 ]. Recognizing this, some journals allow titles and abstracts in multiple languages, although only 18% of journals in biological sciences currently offer this option [ 44 ].

Translating titles and abstracts enhances inclusivity, broadens the scope and impact of research and serves as a bridge to overcome language barriers [ 44 – 47 ]. The reach of scientific studies can be expanded to include scientists, practitioners, policymakers and the general public in non-English speaking regions by making content available in different languages when permitted [ 43 – 48 ]. This fosters a more balanced global understanding of scientific advancements. Furthermore, translating content is likely to broaden recognition, more citations and potential collaborations, amplifying the global resonance of scientific studies. Such a practice promotes equitable engagement in the scientific community, thereby increasing the visibility and impact of research. Keep in mind that the languages that are more impactful for your study’s discoverability may depend on its main topic. Particularly, we recommend translating content into the languages spoken by all co-authors, as well as languages relevant to the study area, organism or field. For instance, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese (simplified), French and Italian are the five non-English languages most used in the conservation biology literature [ 47 ], so they would be ideal choices when translating content on this topic.

(xi) Further considerations

Carefully crafting your title, abstract and keywords is important for search engine optimization. However, it is not the only way to maximize the findability of scientific articles. It is also important to choose the right journal for your paper to maximize its chances of discovery. Targeting the appropriate audience, rather than merely the journal’s impact factor, should be the primary consideration. Exploring various open access options, including green open access (e.g. via preprints like bioRxiv or EcoEvoRxiv), can significantly increase the visibility and accessibility of your work [ 23 , 49 , 50 ]. Indeed, open-access publications have citation advantages over non-open-access counterparts in ecological journals [ 51 , 52 ]. In addition, advertising studies on social media can boost your study’s engagement. In fact, Twitter (now X) activities predict an article’s citation performance better than a journal’s impact factor [ 53 , 54 ]. Although citation performance does not directly relate to discoverability, discoverability is a prerequisite for being cited among the sea of scientific literature. Nevertheless, a study’s citation will ultimately be contingent upon its content; prioritizing rigorous and transparent scientific practices should always outweigh a focus on (over)optimizing discoverability.

Finally, we remind researchers to cite writing guides (including this one!) if they find them useful. Citing writing guides in the methods or acknowledgements section not only credits the authors but also enhances the discoverability and usage of such guidelines. As more people embrace these recommendations, the scientific community at large will benefit from more searchable, clear and engaging literature.

(b) Journal policies in the ecological and evolutionary biology literature

Above, we outlined ten strategic recommendations to optimize the most prominent marketing elements of your study. Nevertheless, these strategies must navigate the limitations imposed by journal guidelines, specifically regarding constraints on the length and structure of title, abstract and keywords. To investigate these constraints, we conducted a literature survey examining the word limits of 230 journals in the fields of ecology and evolutionary biology.

(i) Methods

We report our methods as per the MeRIT guidelines [ 55 ]. On 2022/09/30, CW surveyed journals classified as ‘Ecology’ or ‘Evolutionary Biology’ by Clarivate Journal Citation Reports, and PPottier supplemented this list with 13 multidisciplinary journals including Nature , Nature Communications , Nature Climate Change , Scientific Reports , Science , Science Advances , Communications Biology , Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , PLoS Biology , Biological Reviews , Current Biology , eLife and Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B—Biological Sciences . Our aim was to compile a representative, though non-exhaustive, list of journals publishing studies in ecology and evolutionary biology.

To gauge recommended word limits, PPottier, ML, SB, SMD, ELM, ARM, KM, LR, JT, CW, YY and SN inspected the author guidelines of each journal as of 2022/11/28, quantifying the constraints on title and abstract length, and the maximum number of keywords permitted for standard research articles. Where a range was provided, we used the upper limit. In addition, we assessed whether the abstract layout was flexible or structured.

We further quantified the actual length of titles, abstracts and keywords from a sample of approximately 25 studies from each journal. PPottier conducted a range of bibliographic searches (electronic supplementary material) on 2023/09/11 in Web of Science (core collection) using The University of New South Wales’ subscription and randomly selected 25 of the most recent studies from each journal. For multidisciplinary journals, ML, SB, SMD, PAD, ELM, ARM, AM, KM, PPollo, LR, CW, YY and SN manually inspected studies indexed in Web of Science, selecting the 25 latest standard research articles in ecological and evolutionary biology published between 2022/11/28 (i.e. when journal guidelines were inspected) and 2023/09/11. From this sample of studies, PPottier identified 2321 articles with abstract lengths that differed by at least 25 words from the word limit imposed by journals. As these articles are likely to have different formatting structures than standard article types (e.g. commentaries, opinion pieces, reviews, perspectives and package descriptions), and thus adhere to different journal guidelines, they were further screened by PPottier, ML, SB, SMD, PAD, ELM, ARM, AM, KM, PPollo, LR, CW and SN. We did not screen studies from journals only publishing non-standard article types (e.g. Trends in Ecology & Evolution only publishes reviews and opinions) or multidisciplinary journals. We excluded 383 non-standard articles from our study sample.

Subsequently, PPottier processed the data using R statistical software [ 56 ] (version 4.3.0). PPottier used text mining to measure the length of titles, abstracts and the number of keywords using the stringr package [ 57 ] (version 1.5.0). Note that PPottier excluded studies with abstracts under 50 words, as they were classified as comments or opinion pieces. Furthermore, PPottier analysed whether keywords were duplicated in the title or abstract. In making comparisons between author guidelines and study samples, PPottier excluded journals without explicit word limits for titles, abstracts or keywords. PPottier also conducted a linear regression to correlate title word length with character length and employed predictions from this model (using the predict function) to convert character limits to word limits. In total, we obtained a sample of 5323 studies from 230 journals.

(ii) Journal guidelines

Journal guidelines on title, abstract and keyword limits varied greatly, with a range of 120–500 words and an average of 266.0 words (±66.9 s.d.; figure 3 a ). Most commonly (31.3%), journals adhered to an abstract limit of 250 words; and nearly a quarter (22.6%) of journals did not stipulate an abstract length limit in their guidelines. Additionally, 13.0% of journals permitted structured abstracts using the IMRAD framework or derivatives.

Comparison between word limits imposed by journals and the length of abstracts ( a ) and titles ( b ) in a sample of 5323 studies in ecology and evolutionary biology. Individual data points refer to abstract word or keyword counts from a sample of studies, along with their density distribution. Medians are represented by the thick black lines, interquartile ranges by the boxes, and whiskers extend to 1.5 times the interquartile range. Red lines indicate the abstract or keyword limit imposed by journals.

Titles were frequently unregulated in author guidelines, as 77.0% of journals refrained from imposing a word or character limit, at least in the author guidelines. For journals that did state word limits, titles were recommended not to exceed 15.8 words (±5.3 s.d.) on average (range: 6–33).

With regards to keywords, nearly a quarter (24.1%) of journals did not mention a limit, although it must be noted that these, as well as abstracts and keywords, may be constrained within the journal’s submission platform. In cases where journals did provide a keyword limit in their guidelines, the majority (34.8%) capped the number of keywords at six, with a range of 5–15 words and an average of 7.3 (±2.0 s.d.; figure 3 b ).

(iii) Study samples

Using a sample of approximately 25 recent studies from each journal, we found that the range of abstract lengths varied significantly, spanning from 52 to 1390 words and averaging 238.0 words (±79.4 s.d.; n = 4061; figure 3 a ). Interestingly, abstract lengths often matched restrictions set by journal guidelines; particularly for journals allowing less than 300 words ( figure 3 a ). For journals with word limits equal or above 300 words, abstracts were generally shorter than the word limit ( figure 3 a ). Therefore, 250 words are likely sufficient for most authors to accurately describe the content of their study.

In journals stating explicit title word limits, title lengths ranged from 2 to 33 words, with an average of 13.8 words (±4.2 s.d.; n = 1207). In other journals, title lengths were similar, averaging 14.8 words (±4.5 s.d.; n = 4116).

In our sample of studies, we found that the number of keywords averaged 5.9 (±1.6 s.d.; range 1–18; n = 3907; figure 3 b ). This figure is surprisingly lower than what author guidelines typically prescribe (7.3 keywords ± 2.0 s.d.; figure 3 b ). Interestingly, 92.3% of the studies in our survey ( n = 4525) duplicated at least one keyword in either the title or abstract, which we found was occasionally recommended in journal policies. On average, 2.68 (±1.62 s.d.) keywords were reused in the title or abstract, which represents 45.8% (±0.25 s.d.) of the keywords used.

2.  Recommendations to editors

In an era where information is increasingly digitized, publishing constraints traditionally imposed by print media may no longer be fitting. Our investigation into journal guidelines, and how authors engage with abstract length and keyword limitations, yields insights that call for a potential re-evaluation of current practices.

(a) Adopting structured abstracts and reconsidering word limits

Our survey reveals that authors frequently push their abstracts to the maximum allowable length ( figure 3 a ). This trend is especially pronounced in journals with stringent word constraints (≤200 words), indicating that current word limits may be overly restrictive. Historically, these limits were rooted in the physical space constrained by printed journals. In today’s digital landscape, such limitations are less relevant and may hinder the discoverability and citation of research.

We encourage editors to consider adopting (optional) structured abstracts, which often have the advantage of ensuring that authors do not omit to specify key aspects of their study [ 58 , 59 ]. In the field of ecology and evolutionary biology, information such as the taxonomic group, species name, location, study type and variables investigated are essential study aspects that should always be stated. Given that structured abstracts are typically longer [ 60 ] and that authors already approach word limits, editors may need to consider relaxing word count constraints. As demonstrated with examples using abstract lengths of 120 and 250 words ( figure 2 ), an increase in word count can allow authors to supplement their abstract with additional key terms. This adjustment could significantly enhance the discoverability of studies not only for regular author searches but also for systematic reviews. Similar to title characteristics, evidence linking abstract length to impact metrics is mixed [ 23 , 61 – 63 ]. However, longer abstracts generally tend to be positively related to citation rates, although the effects are only weak or moderate [ 23 , 63 , 64 ]. This suggests that the content of the abstract is likely more important than its length. Consequently, offering the opportunity for authors to describe their content more accurately may facilitate discovery and impact.

(b) Optimizing keyword usage

Most journals limit the number of keywords, constraining the study’s association with synonyms and relevant terms. We recommend that journals implement a large keyword limit to enhance discoverability. In fact, recent evidence suggests that the number of keywords is positively correlated with citation rates [ 23 , 35 , 64 ]. Increasing keyword limits is also perhaps easier to implement than increased abstract lengths. In fact, we believe there are no clear incentives to restrict the number of keywords, and both authors and journals could benefit from increased discoverability. Implementing a standardized term system that is machine-readable, akin to MeSH terms for biology, could also help authors choose the right terminology and increase indexing. Our survey also revealed that authors generally do not use all the keywords allowed. We argue that this is a missed opportunity. We encourage authors, editors and reviewers to leverage the potential of strategic and comprehensive keyword selection.

A concerted effort by editors and reviewers to assess keywords (as well as key terms in the abstract and title) for relevance, accuracy and redundancy can further ensure that these terms genuinely reflect the study’s content and optimize discoverability. In fact, 92% of the studies we surveyed used redundant key terms between the title, abstract and keyword sections, although this can negatively influence discoverability and impact [ 26 ]. Ensuring that the right keywords are used and placed thoughtfully in these critical places of a study would be an important step to increase the discoverability and impact of scientific publications.

(c) Accepting multilingual content

Publishing multilingual abstracts and titles could significantly amplify the global resonance of scientific studies, enhancing accessibility across linguistic barriers. However, only 18% of journals in biological sciences allow multilingual abstracts [ 44 ]. We encourage editors to consider publishing multilingual summaries to increase the accessibility of scientific knowledge in countries where English is not the primary language, potentially yielding a greater impact [ 44 – 48 ]. For instance, FEMS (Federation of European Microbiological Societies) journals have translated the abstracts and titles of numerous articles in Portuguese and Spanish, which has significantly increased knowledge discovery ( https://academic.oup.com/fems-journals/pages/alam_2018 ; accessed on 2023/08/23). As translation tools have yet to properly incorporate highly specific and complex terminology in scientific research, we believe it is valuable to allow authors to submit multilingual content. By embracing multilingual abstracts and titles, editors can foster greater inclusivity and bridge the language divide, enriching the global scientific dialogue and allowing valuable research to reach an even wider audience.

3.  Conclusions

Crafting a title, abstract and choosing the right keywords is an art in itself. By understanding how scientific studies are indexed in databases and searched by authors, we can strategically increase the discoverability and impact of scientific research. Particularly, the strategic use and placement of keywords can maximize indexing, in turn laying the groundwork for discoverability and impact. Comparing author guidelines with samples of studies from journals in ecology and evolutionary biology, we found that authors often push their abstract to the maximum word limit allowed and that the number of keywords used is low and mostly redundant. These reflect restrictive guidelines that may be relics of the print era when physical page limits existed and are not optimized to increase the discoverability of studies in the rapidly expanding landscape of digital publications. Therefore, we encourage journals to use effective strategies to maximize the impact of their publications. By embracing these recommendations, editors can create an environment that aligns with the digital era and promotes the broader dissemination and impact of scientific research. Such actions reflect a recognition of the evolving needs of the scientific community and the critical role of discoverability in shaping the scientific knowledge landscape.

Acknowledgements

This work has been conducted during weekly meetings with the Interdisciplinary Ecology and Evolution Lab (i-deel) at the University of New South Wales. We acknowledge the Bedegal people, the traditional custodians of the land in which this work took place. This work was not supported by a specific grant.

This work did not require ethical approval from a human subject or animal welfare committee.

Data accessibility

Declaration of ai use.

The authors declare that they have used GPT 4.0 and GPT 3.5 (OpenAI) to improve the clarity and readability of this work. After using these tools, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and took full responsibility for the content of the publication.

Authors’ contributions

P.P.: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, software, validation, visualization, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; M.L.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology visualization, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; S.B.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; S.M.D.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, writing—review and editing; P.A.D.: investigation, methodology, writing—review and editing; E.L.M.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, writing—review and editing; A.R.M.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; A.M.: investigation, methodology, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; K.M.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; P.P.: investigation, methodology, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; L.R.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; J.T.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; C.W.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, visualization, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; Y.Y.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing; S.N.: conceptualization, investigation, methodology, supervision, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing.

All authors gave final approval for publication and agreed to be held accountable for the work performed therein.

Conflict of interest declaration

We declare we have no competing interests.

No funding has been received for this article.

Prospective Registration of Trials: Where we are, why, and how we could get better

• Find this author on Google Scholar
• Find this author on PubMed
• Search for this author on this site
• ORCID record for Denis Mongin
• ORCID record for Diana Buitrago-Garcia
• ORCID record for Thomas Agoritsas
• ORCID record for Cem Gabay
• ORCID record for Delphine Shophie Courvoisier
• ORCID record for Michele Iudici
• For correspondence: [email protected]
• Info/History
• Supplementary material
• Preview PDF

Objectives: Transparent trial conduct requires prospective registration of a randomized controlled trial before the enrolment of the first participant. Registration aims to minimize potential biases through unjustified or hidden modification of trial design. We aimed to (1) estimate the proportion of randomized controlled trials that are prospectively registered and determine the time trends and the factors associated with prospective registration; (2) evaluate the reasons for non-adherence with prospective registration and explore potential mechanisms to enhance adherence with prospective registration. We studied trials published in rheumatology as a case study. Design and setting: We searched for reports of trials in rheumatology published between January 2009 and December 2022 using MEDLINE-PubMed. We retrieved trial registration numbers using metadata and reviewed full texts. We conducted a multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with prospective trial registration. We sent an online survey to authors of trials that were not prospectively registered. We inquired about possible reasons for non-adherence with prospective registration and asked about potential solutions. Results: We identified 1093 primary reports of randomized controlled trials; 453 (41.4%) were not prospectively registered. Of these, 130 (11.9%) were not registered, and 323 (29.5%) were retrospectively registered. Prospective registration increased over time at a rate of 3% per year (p<0.001), with only 13.3% (2/15) trials prospectively registered in 2009 to 73.2% (112/153) trials in 2022. Even among journals publicly supporting ICMJE recommendation, 16% of the trials published in 2022 were not prospectively registered. In the multivariable model, prospective registration was associated with a larger sample size, recruitment conducted across countries, and publication in a journal with a higher impact factor. Trial evaluating non pharmaceutical intervention, especially education, delivery of health care or wellness, had a lower rate of prospective registration. Investigators reported lack of knowledge, or organizational problems as the main reasons for retrospective registration. Authors also suggested linking ethical approval to trial registration as the best option to ensure prospective registration. Conclusions: Despite significant improvement, adherence to prospective registration remains unsatisfactory in rheumatology. Different strategies targeting journal editors, healthcare professionals, and researchers may improve trial registration.

Competing Interest Statement

TA is the Chair of the Magic Evidence Ecosystem Foundation. MI received consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim. Received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer Ingelheim and CSL Vifor, and has participated in the Advisory Board for Novartis. DM, DBG, SC, DSC and CG declare no conflict of interests.

Funding Statement

Swiss National Science Foundation. Grant number 212393.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

In the initial submission, in the author section in Medrxv, one author who appears in the manuscript was not added (Cem Gabay); this revision adds him as an Author.

Data Availability

Code and data are available at the following Gitlab repository:

https://gitlab.unige.ch/trial_integrity/prospective_registration_public

View the discussion thread.

Supplementary Material

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Citation Manager Formats

• EndNote (tagged)
• EndNote 8 (xml)
• RefWorks Tagged
• Ref Manager
• Tweet Widget
• Facebook Like
• Google Plus One

Subject Area

• Rheumatology
• Addiction Medicine (335)
• Allergy and Immunology (658)
• Anesthesia (177)
• Cardiovascular Medicine (2565)
• Dentistry and Oral Medicine (310)
• Dermatology (217)
• Emergency Medicine (389)
• Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (907)
• Epidemiology (12070)
• Forensic Medicine (10)
• Gastroenterology (741)
• Genetic and Genomic Medicine (3983)
• Geriatric Medicine (375)
• Health Economics (666)
• Health Informatics (2572)
• Health Policy (992)
• Health Systems and Quality Improvement (955)
• Hematology (357)
• HIV/AIDS (824)
• Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13567)
• Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (783)
• Medical Education (394)
• Medical Ethics (106)
• Nephrology (422)
• Neurology (3747)
• Nursing (206)
• Nutrition (558)
• Obstetrics and Gynecology (717)
• Occupational and Environmental Health (686)
• Oncology (1948)
• Ophthalmology (565)
• Orthopedics (233)
• Otolaryngology (300)
• Pain Medicine (246)
• Palliative Medicine (72)
• Pathology (469)
• Pediatrics (1088)
• Pharmacology and Therapeutics (453)
• Primary Care Research (442)
• Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3346)
• Public and Global Health (6411)
• Radiology and Imaging (1354)
• Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (793)
• Respiratory Medicine (857)
• Rheumatology (394)
• Sexual and Reproductive Health (395)
• Sports Medicine (336)
• Surgery (431)
• Toxicology (51)
• Transplantation (184)
• Urology (162)