Abstract
This proposal presents guidelines for preparing informative abstracts of review articles. Six guidelines are proposed: 1. The abstract should begin with a precise statement of the primary objective of the review. 2. The data sources for the review should be succinctly summarized. 3. The criteria used to select studies from the data sources and the method by which these criteria were applied should be specified. 4. The guidelines used for abstracting data and assessing data quality should be described. 5. The main results of the review and the methods used to obtain these results should be stated. 6. Conclusions and potential applications of the review's results should be clearly and succinctly stated. Application of these guidelines can lead to efficient identification of relevant, scientifically sound review articles, a greater awareness of the vital elements of a good review article, more precise computerized literature searches, and improved peer-review processes.
Keywords
MedicineIdentification (biology)Statement (logic)Data scienceMEDLINEMedical physicsInformation retrievalManagement scienceComputer scienceEpistemology
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
More Informative Abstracts Revisited
Following proposals in 1987 and 1988, several medical journals have provided more informative abstracts ("structured abstracts") for articles of clinical interest. Structured ab...
Formulating Questions and Locating Primary Studies for Inclusion in Systematic Reviews
Much time and effort are spent on designing primary research studies. Similar care must be given to planning systematic reviews. The review should be based on an important, well...
Scope, quality, and inclusivity of clinical guidelines produced early in the covid-19 pandemic: rapid review
Abstract Objective To appraise the availability, quality, and inclusivity of clinical guidelines produced in the early stage of the coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) pandemic....
What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians?
Guideline developers use a bewildering variety of systems to rate the quality of the evidence underlying their recommendations. Some are facile, some confused, and others sophis...
Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 9. Grading evidence and recommendations
Should WHO grade the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations? Users of recommendations need to know how much confidence they can place in the underlying evidence...
Publication Info
- Year
- 1988
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 108
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 613-615
- Citations
- 103
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Altmetric
PlumX Metrics
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
103
OpenAlex
Cite This
Cynthia D. Mulrow,
Stephen B. Thacker,
Jacqueline A. Pugh
(1988).
A Proposal for More Informative Abstracts of Review Articles.
Annals of Internal Medicine
, 108
(4)
, 613-615.
https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-108-4-613
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.7326/0003-4819-108-4-613