|
INTRODUCTION
When speaking about the abstract readers usually think of abstracts
used in primary journals that enable scientists to keep up in
active areas of research. An abstract should provide a brief summary
of each of the main sections of the paper. American National Standards
Institute defined "a well-prepared abstract" as one that "enables
readers to identify the basic content of a document quickly and
accurately, to determine its relevance to their interests, and
thus to decide whether they need to read the document in its entirety".
Scientists should master the fundamentals of abstract preparation
for several reasons:
a "heading" abstract is required by most journal;
a "meeting" or "conference" abstract is a requirement for participation
in scientific meetings - participation being sometimes determined
on the basis of submitted abstracts;
Many people will read the abstract, in the original journal or
in any of secondary publications, either in printed edition or
in online computer searches.
TYPES OF ABSTRACTS
There are two types of abstracts. The abstract used in primary
journals is often referred to as an informative abstract. It is
designed to condense the paper. It should briefly state the principal
objectives and scope of the investigation, describe the methods
employed, summarize the results and state the principal conclusions.
That abstract is used as a "heading" in most journals today and
often supplants the need for reading the full paper. Another common
type of abstract is referred to as an indicative, somethimes called
a descriptive, abstract. This type of abstract is designed to
indicate the subjects dealt with in a paper. Because of its descriptive
rather then substantive nature, it can seldom serve as a substitute
for the full paper. Thus, it should not be used as "heading" abstracts
in research papers, but may be used in other types of publications
such as review papers and conference reports. The indicative abstracts
are often of great value to reference librarians. Whatever the
abstract used in the primary journals, some rules are usually
applied and the following should be remembered :
The abstract shoud never give any information or conclusion that
is not stated in the paper.
The abstract should not exceed 250 words and should be designed
to define clearly what is dealt with in the paper.
Most or all abstracts should be written in the past tense, because
it refers to work done.
The abstract should be typed as a single papragraph. Some medical
journals now run "structured" abstracts consisiting of a few brief
paragraphs.
The language should be familiar to the potential reader.
Use of obscure abbreviations and acronyms should be omitted.
Unless a long term is used several times within an abstract, do
not abbreviate the term.
The literature must not be cited, except in rare instances, such
as modification of a previously published method.
Write the paper before you write the abstract, whenever possible.
CONFERENCE ABSTRACT
There are certain differences between "heading" abstract and "conference"
abstract. However, the differences are less than previously stated
and the most of the above rules apply to both types of abstracts.
The essential purpose of the "conference" abstract is to attract
and gain the acceptance of the conference organiser. The hallmark
of an effective abstract is to avoid fine detail but to capture
the key aspects of the presentation. Since the conference may
be many months ahead, you may not know what data you will have
by then or whether the findings will be positive or negative.
Thus, you should give just enough to make your presentation sound
novel and interesting, emphassising any new techniques or interseting
uses of old ones. Give some data if you can and avoid the off-putting
expression ". . . will be discussed". In recent years, the conference
organizers usually set word length for abstracts which must be
strictly adhered to, otherwise the abstract may be rejecetd e.
g. states that the abstract must be no longer than 2000 characters(for
online version) or restricted number of words (usally up to 250
words) , and must have sections labelled as folllows: Objective(s)
, Methods, Results and Conclusion(s) . Titles should be used to
capture the attention of the audience. They are short(often less
than 10 words) and state the subject of the paper but never the
conclusion. Setting the names of the authors and their affiliations
are aslo predetermined by the instructions. In case anyone might
want to get in touch with you after the conference, it is suggested
to include your address, phone, fax and e-mail numbers. In comparison
to primary journal literature abstracts where bibliographic, figures,
or table-references are not recommended, in the "conference" abstracts
it is allowed and even suggested to present results in figures
or tables. It is helpful to the participants to include any key
references in the abstract, so that they will be readily avilable
in the abstract books. It is usually allowed to the participants
to word the text, in the online abstract version only, up to the
deadline for abstract submisson but it is also necessary to follow
the conference instructions, such as fitting the abstract into
camera-ready frame on the abstract form provided. In recent times,
"conference abstracts" have fallen into disrepute because some
conference organisers have published them no matter whether they
were referred or not, whether they were accepted for the conference
or not, and, if accepted, whether the authors had turned up and
presented them or not. It may also be impossible to change the
abstract before it enters the public domain, under your name,
if other participants show your ideas or interpretations to be
wrong. Therefore, it is of fundamental importance that the abstract
be written clearly and simply. If you cannot attract the interest
of the reviewer/conference organiser in your abstract, your cause
may be lost.
REFERENCES
1. Day AR. How to write and published a
scientific paper. Phoenix-New York: Oryx Press; 1998. p. 29-32.
2. Whmister F W. Biomedical research. How to plan, publish and
present it. London: Springer. 1997. p. 155-6.
3. Savić J. Kako napisati, objaviti i vrednovti naučno delo u
biomedicini. Beograd: Kultura; 1996. p. 8-56.
4. Philips JS. Principles of the scientific paper. In: EAU Publication
Committee - Chairman: Prof. C. Schulman. editor. How to: write
and publish scientific papers. Proceedings of the the educational
symposium. "Effective Communications for Urologists"; 1999. p.
7-10.
|
|