澄清系统文献综述的摘要。

J Hartley
{"title":"澄清系统文献综述的摘要。","authors":"J Hartley","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a small body of research on improving the clarity of abstracts in general that is relevant to improving the clarity of abstracts of systematic reviews.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To summarize this earlier research and indicate its implications for writing the abstracts of systematic reviews.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Literature review with commentary on three main features affecting the clarity of abstracts: their language, structure, and typographical presentation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The abstracts of systematic reviews should be easier to read than the abstracts of medical research articles, as they are targeted at a wider audience. The aims, methods, results, and conclusions of systematic reviews need to be presented in a consistent way to help search and retrieval. The typographic detailing of the abstracts (type-sizes, spacing, and weights) should be planned to help, rather than confuse, the reader.</p>","PeriodicalId":72483,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Medical Library Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2000-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC35254/pdf/i0025-7338-088-04-0332.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clarifying the abstracts of systematic literature reviews.\",\"authors\":\"J Hartley\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a small body of research on improving the clarity of abstracts in general that is relevant to improving the clarity of abstracts of systematic reviews.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To summarize this earlier research and indicate its implications for writing the abstracts of systematic reviews.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Literature review with commentary on three main features affecting the clarity of abstracts: their language, structure, and typographical presentation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The abstracts of systematic reviews should be easier to read than the abstracts of medical research articles, as they are targeted at a wider audience. The aims, methods, results, and conclusions of systematic reviews need to be presented in a consistent way to help search and retrieval. The typographic detailing of the abstracts (type-sizes, spacing, and weights) should be planned to help, rather than confuse, the reader.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72483,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of the Medical Library Association\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2000-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC35254/pdf/i0025-7338-088-04-0332.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of the Medical Library Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the Medical Library Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:总体而言,有一小部分关于提高摘要清晰度的研究与提高系统综述摘要清晰度有关。目的:总结这一早期研究,并指出其对撰写系统综述摘要的意义。方法:文献综述,并对影响摘要清晰度的三个主要特征进行评论:语言、结构和排版。结论:系统综述的摘要应该比医学研究文章的摘要更容易阅读,因为它们的目标受众更广泛。系统综述的目的、方法、结果和结论需要以一致的方式呈现,以帮助搜索和检索。摘要的排版细节(字体大小、间距和粗细)应该计划好帮助而不是迷惑读者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Clarifying the abstracts of systematic literature reviews.

Background: There is a small body of research on improving the clarity of abstracts in general that is relevant to improving the clarity of abstracts of systematic reviews.

Objectives: To summarize this earlier research and indicate its implications for writing the abstracts of systematic reviews.

Method: Literature review with commentary on three main features affecting the clarity of abstracts: their language, structure, and typographical presentation.

Conclusions: The abstracts of systematic reviews should be easier to read than the abstracts of medical research articles, as they are targeted at a wider audience. The aims, methods, results, and conclusions of systematic reviews need to be presented in a consistent way to help search and retrieval. The typographic detailing of the abstracts (type-sizes, spacing, and weights) should be planned to help, rather than confuse, the reader.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The President's Page Research methodology. FORTISSIMO! Binding. And Now For Something Completely Different
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1