Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Definition and Purpose of Abstracts

An abstract is a short summary of your (published or unpublished) research paper, usually about a paragraph (c. 6-7 sentences, 150-250 words) long. A well-written abstract serves multiple purposes:

  • an abstract lets readers get the gist or essence of your paper or article quickly, in order to decide whether to read the full paper;
  • an abstract prepares readers to follow the detailed information, analyses, and arguments in your full paper;
  • and, later, an abstract helps readers remember key points from your paper.

It’s also worth remembering that search engines and bibliographic databases use abstracts, as well as the title, to identify key terms for indexing your published paper. So what you include in your abstract and in your title are crucial for helping other researchers find your paper or article.

If you are writing an abstract for a course paper, your professor may give you specific guidelines for what to include and how to organize your abstract. Similarly, academic journals often have specific requirements for abstracts. So in addition to following the advice on this page, you should be sure to look for and follow any guidelines from the course or journal you’re writing for.

The Contents of an Abstract

Abstracts contain most of the following kinds of information in brief form. The body of your paper will, of course, develop and explain these ideas much more fully. As you will see in the samples below, the proportion of your abstract that you devote to each kind of information—and the sequence of that information—will vary, depending on the nature and genre of the paper that you are summarizing in your abstract. And in some cases, some of this information is implied, rather than stated explicitly. The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association , which is widely used in the social sciences, gives specific guidelines for what to include in the abstract for different kinds of papers—for empirical studies, literature reviews or meta-analyses, theoretical papers, methodological papers, and case studies.

Here are the typical kinds of information found in most abstracts:

  • the context or background information for your research; the general topic under study; the specific topic of your research
  • the central questions or statement of the problem your research addresses
  • what’s already known about this question, what previous research has done or shown
  • the main reason(s) , the exigency, the rationale , the goals for your research—Why is it important to address these questions? Are you, for example, examining a new topic? Why is that topic worth examining? Are you filling a gap in previous research? Applying new methods to take a fresh look at existing ideas or data? Resolving a dispute within the literature in your field? . . .
  • your research and/or analytical methods
  • your main findings , results , or arguments
  • the significance or implications of your findings or arguments.

Your abstract should be intelligible on its own, without a reader’s having to read your entire paper. And in an abstract, you usually do not cite references—most of your abstract will describe what you have studied in your research and what you have found and what you argue in your paper. In the body of your paper, you will cite the specific literature that informs your research.

When to Write Your Abstract

Although you might be tempted to write your abstract first because it will appear as the very first part of your paper, it’s a good idea to wait to write your abstract until after you’ve drafted your full paper, so that you know what you’re summarizing.

What follows are some sample abstracts in published papers or articles, all written by faculty at UW-Madison who come from a variety of disciplines. We have annotated these samples to help you see the work that these authors are doing within their abstracts.

Choosing Verb Tenses within Your Abstract

The social science sample (Sample 1) below uses the present tense to describe general facts and interpretations that have been and are currently true, including the prevailing explanation for the social phenomenon under study. That abstract also uses the present tense to describe the methods, the findings, the arguments, and the implications of the findings from their new research study. The authors use the past tense to describe previous research.

The humanities sample (Sample 2) below uses the past tense to describe completed events in the past (the texts created in the pulp fiction industry in the 1970s and 80s) and uses the present tense to describe what is happening in those texts, to explain the significance or meaning of those texts, and to describe the arguments presented in the article.

The science samples (Samples 3 and 4) below use the past tense to describe what previous research studies have done and the research the authors have conducted, the methods they have followed, and what they have found. In their rationale or justification for their research (what remains to be done), they use the present tense. They also use the present tense to introduce their study (in Sample 3, “Here we report . . .”) and to explain the significance of their study (In Sample 3, This reprogramming . . . “provides a scalable cell source for. . .”).

Sample Abstract 1

From the social sciences.

Reporting new findings about the reasons for increasing economic homogamy among spouses

Gonalons-Pons, Pilar, and Christine R. Schwartz. “Trends in Economic Homogamy: Changes in Assortative Mating or the Division of Labor in Marriage?” Demography , vol. 54, no. 3, 2017, pp. 985-1005.

“The growing economic resemblance of spouses has contributed to rising inequality by increasing the number of couples in which there are two high- or two low-earning partners. [Annotation for the previous sentence: The first sentence introduces the topic under study (the “economic resemblance of spouses”). This sentence also implies the question underlying this research study: what are the various causes—and the interrelationships among them—for this trend?] The dominant explanation for this trend is increased assortative mating. Previous research has primarily relied on cross-sectional data and thus has been unable to disentangle changes in assortative mating from changes in the division of spouses’ paid labor—a potentially key mechanism given the dramatic rise in wives’ labor supply. [Annotation for the previous two sentences: These next two sentences explain what previous research has demonstrated. By pointing out the limitations in the methods that were used in previous studies, they also provide a rationale for new research.] We use data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) to decompose the increase in the correlation between spouses’ earnings and its contribution to inequality between 1970 and 2013 into parts due to (a) changes in assortative mating, and (b) changes in the division of paid labor. [Annotation for the previous sentence: The data, research and analytical methods used in this new study.] Contrary to what has often been assumed, the rise of economic homogamy and its contribution to inequality is largely attributable to changes in the division of paid labor rather than changes in sorting on earnings or earnings potential. Our findings indicate that the rise of economic homogamy cannot be explained by hypotheses centered on meeting and matching opportunities, and they show where in this process inequality is generated and where it is not.” (p. 985) [Annotation for the previous two sentences: The major findings from and implications and significance of this study.]

Sample Abstract 2

From the humanities.

Analyzing underground pulp fiction publications in Tanzania, this article makes an argument about the cultural significance of those publications

Emily Callaci. “Street Textuality: Socialism, Masculinity, and Urban Belonging in Tanzania’s Pulp Fiction Publishing Industry, 1975-1985.” Comparative Studies in Society and History , vol. 59, no. 1, 2017, pp. 183-210.

“From the mid-1970s through the mid-1980s, a network of young urban migrant men created an underground pulp fiction publishing industry in the city of Dar es Salaam. [Annotation for the previous sentence: The first sentence introduces the context for this research and announces the topic under study.] As texts that were produced in the underground economy of a city whose trajectory was increasingly charted outside of formalized planning and investment, these novellas reveal more than their narrative content alone. These texts were active components in the urban social worlds of the young men who produced them. They reveal a mode of urbanism otherwise obscured by narratives of decolonization, in which urban belonging was constituted less by national citizenship than by the construction of social networks, economic connections, and the crafting of reputations. This article argues that pulp fiction novellas of socialist era Dar es Salaam are artifacts of emergent forms of male sociability and mobility. In printing fictional stories about urban life on pilfered paper and ink, and distributing their texts through informal channels, these writers not only described urban communities, reputations, and networks, but also actually created them.” (p. 210) [Annotation for the previous sentences: The remaining sentences in this abstract interweave other essential information for an abstract for this article. The implied research questions: What do these texts mean? What is their historical and cultural significance, produced at this time, in this location, by these authors? The argument and the significance of this analysis in microcosm: these texts “reveal a mode or urbanism otherwise obscured . . .”; and “This article argues that pulp fiction novellas. . . .” This section also implies what previous historical research has obscured. And through the details in its argumentative claims, this section of the abstract implies the kinds of methods the author has used to interpret the novellas and the concepts under study (e.g., male sociability and mobility, urban communities, reputations, network. . . ).]

Sample Abstract/Summary 3

From the sciences.

Reporting a new method for reprogramming adult mouse fibroblasts into induced cardiac progenitor cells

Lalit, Pratik A., Max R. Salick, Daryl O. Nelson, Jayne M. Squirrell, Christina M. Shafer, Neel G. Patel, Imaan Saeed, Eric G. Schmuck, Yogananda S. Markandeya, Rachel Wong, Martin R. Lea, Kevin W. Eliceiri, Timothy A. Hacker, Wendy C. Crone, Michael Kyba, Daniel J. Garry, Ron Stewart, James A. Thomson, Karen M. Downs, Gary E. Lyons, and Timothy J. Kamp. “Lineage Reprogramming of Fibroblasts into Proliferative Induced Cardiac Progenitor Cells by Defined Factors.” Cell Stem Cell , vol. 18, 2016, pp. 354-367.

“Several studies have reported reprogramming of fibroblasts into induced cardiomyocytes; however, reprogramming into proliferative induced cardiac progenitor cells (iCPCs) remains to be accomplished. [Annotation for the previous sentence: The first sentence announces the topic under study, summarizes what’s already known or been accomplished in previous research, and signals the rationale and goals are for the new research and the problem that the new research solves: How can researchers reprogram fibroblasts into iCPCs?] Here we report that a combination of 11 or 5 cardiac factors along with canonical Wnt and JAK/STAT signaling reprogrammed adult mouse cardiac, lung, and tail tip fibroblasts into iCPCs. The iCPCs were cardiac mesoderm-restricted progenitors that could be expanded extensively while maintaining multipo-tency to differentiate into cardiomyocytes, smooth muscle cells, and endothelial cells in vitro. Moreover, iCPCs injected into the cardiac crescent of mouse embryos differentiated into cardiomyocytes. iCPCs transplanted into the post-myocardial infarction mouse heart improved survival and differentiated into cardiomyocytes, smooth muscle cells, and endothelial cells. [Annotation for the previous four sentences: The methods the researchers developed to achieve their goal and a description of the results.] Lineage reprogramming of adult somatic cells into iCPCs provides a scalable cell source for drug discovery, disease modeling, and cardiac regenerative therapy.” (p. 354) [Annotation for the previous sentence: The significance or implications—for drug discovery, disease modeling, and therapy—of this reprogramming of adult somatic cells into iCPCs.]

Sample Abstract 4, a Structured Abstract

Reporting results about the effectiveness of antibiotic therapy in managing acute bacterial sinusitis, from a rigorously controlled study

Note: This journal requires authors to organize their abstract into four specific sections, with strict word limits. Because the headings for this structured abstract are self-explanatory, we have chosen not to add annotations to this sample abstract.

Wald, Ellen R., David Nash, and Jens Eickhoff. “Effectiveness of Amoxicillin/Clavulanate Potassium in the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Sinusitis in Children.” Pediatrics , vol. 124, no. 1, 2009, pp. 9-15.

“OBJECTIVE: The role of antibiotic therapy in managing acute bacterial sinusitis (ABS) in children is controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of high-dose amoxicillin/potassium clavulanate in the treatment of children diagnosed with ABS.

METHODS : This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Children 1 to 10 years of age with a clinical presentation compatible with ABS were eligible for participation. Patients were stratified according to age (<6 or ≥6 years) and clinical severity and randomly assigned to receive either amoxicillin (90 mg/kg) with potassium clavulanate (6.4 mg/kg) or placebo. A symptom survey was performed on days 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 20, and 30. Patients were examined on day 14. Children’s conditions were rated as cured, improved, or failed according to scoring rules.

RESULTS: Two thousand one hundred thirty-five children with respiratory complaints were screened for enrollment; 139 (6.5%) had ABS. Fifty-eight patients were enrolled, and 56 were randomly assigned. The mean age was 6630 months. Fifty (89%) patients presented with persistent symptoms, and 6 (11%) presented with nonpersistent symptoms. In 24 (43%) children, the illness was classified as mild, whereas in the remaining 32 (57%) children it was severe. Of the 28 children who received the antibiotic, 14 (50%) were cured, 4 (14%) were improved, 4(14%) experienced treatment failure, and 6 (21%) withdrew. Of the 28children who received placebo, 4 (14%) were cured, 5 (18%) improved, and 19 (68%) experienced treatment failure. Children receiving the antibiotic were more likely to be cured (50% vs 14%) and less likely to have treatment failure (14% vs 68%) than children receiving the placebo.

CONCLUSIONS : ABS is a common complication of viral upper respiratory infections. Amoxicillin/potassium clavulanate results in significantly more cures and fewer failures than placebo, according to parental report of time to resolution.” (9)

Some Excellent Advice about Writing Abstracts for Basic Science Research Papers, by Professor Adriano Aguzzi from the Institute of Neuropathology at the University of Zurich:

how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

Academic and Professional Writing

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

  • Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
  • Guided brainstorming exercises
  • Get more help with your essay
  • Frequently Asked Questions

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

How to Write an Abstract for a Scientific Paper

  • Chemical Laws
  • Periodic Table
  • Projects & Experiments
  • Scientific Method
  • Biochemistry
  • Physical Chemistry
  • Medical Chemistry
  • Chemistry In Everyday Life
  • Famous Chemists
  • Activities for Kids
  • Abbreviations & Acronyms
  • Weather & Climate
  • Ph.D., Biomedical Sciences, University of Tennessee at Knoxville
  • B.A., Physics and Mathematics, Hastings College

If you're preparing a research paper or grant proposal, you'll need to know how to write an abstract. Here's a look at what an abstract is and how to write one.

An abstract is a concise summary of an experiment or research project. It should be brief -- typically under 200 words. The purpose of the abstract is to summarize the research paper by stating the purpose of the research, the experimental method, the findings, and the conclusions.

  • How to Write an Abstract

The format you'll use for the abstract depends on its purpose. If you're writing for a specific publication or a class assignment, you'll probably need to follow specific guidelines. If there isn't a required format, you'll need to choose from one of two possible types of abstracts.

Informational Abstracts

An informational abstract is a type of abstract used to communicate an experiment or lab report .

  • An informational abstract is like a mini-paper. Its length ranges from a paragraph to 1 to 2 pages, depending on the scope of the report. Aim for less than 10% the length of the full report.
  • Summarize all aspects of the report, including purpose, method, results, conclusions, and recommendations. There are no graphs, charts, tables, or images in an abstract. Similarly, an abstract does not include a bibliography or references.
  • Highlight important discoveries or anomalies. It's okay if the experiment did not go as planned and necessary to state the outcome in the abstract.

Here is a good format to follow, in order, when writing an informational abstract. Each section is a sentence or two long:

  • Motivation or Purpose: State why the subject is important or why anyone should care about the experiment and its results.
  • Problem: State the hypothesis of the experiment or describe the problem you are trying to solve.
  • Method: How did you test the hypothesis or try to solve the problem?
  • Results: What was the outcome of the study? Did you support or reject a hypothesis? Did you solve a problem? How close were the results to what you expected? State-specific numbers.
  • Conclusions: What is the significance of your findings? Do the results lead to an increase in knowledge, a solution that may be applied to other problems, etc.?

Need examples? The abstracts at PubMed.gov (National Institutes of Health database) are informational abstracts. A random example is this abstract on the effect of coffee consumption on Acute Coronary Syndrome .

Descriptive Abstracts

A descriptive abstract is an extremely brief description of the contents of a report. Its purpose is to tell the reader what to expect from the full paper.

  • A descriptive abstract is very short, typically less than 100 words.
  • Tells the reader what the report contains, but doesn't go into detail.
  • It briefly summarizes the purpose and experimental method, but not the results or conclusions. Basically, say why and how the study was made, but don't go into findings. 

Tips for Writing a Good Abstract

  • Write the paper before writing the abstract. You might be tempted to start with the abstract since it comes between the title page and the paper, but it's much easier to summarize a paper or report after it has been completed.
  • Write in the third person. Replace phrases like "I found" or "we examined" with phrases like "it was determined" or "this paper provides" or "the investigators found".
  • Write the abstract and then pare it down to meet the word limit. In some cases, a long abstract will result in automatic rejection for publication or a grade!
  • Think of keywords and phrases a person looking for your work might use or enter into a search engine. Include those words in your abstract. Even if the paper won't be published, this is a good habit to develop.
  • All information in the abstract must be covered in the body of the paper. Don't put a fact in the abstract that isn't described in the report.
  • Proof-read the abstract for typos, spelling mistakes, and punctuation errors.
  • Abstract Writing for Sociology
  • How to Write a Science Fair Project Report
  • How to Format a Biology Lab Report
  • Six Steps of the Scientific Method
  • How to Write a Lab Report
  • Science Lab Report Template - Fill in the Blanks
  • What Is Depth of Knowledge?
  • An Introduction to Academic Writing
  • Null Hypothesis Definition and Examples
  • Scientific Method Flow Chart
  • How To Design a Science Fair Experiment
  • How to Write a Research Paper That Earns an A
  • Writing a Lesson Plan: Closure and Context
  • What Is a Testable Hypothesis?

View the latest institution tables

View the latest country/territory tables

How to write an abstract that stands out

A well-written abstract helps to attract readership.

how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

Credit: vladwel/Getty Images

10 August 2021

how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

vladwel/Getty Images

The brevity of an abstract belies its importance to a manuscript. It’s what catches a reader’s attention and helps them to decide whether a paper is relevant. Yet failing to reflect the content of the paper in the abstract was singled out as the most common error in a recently published study of problems in biomedical manuscripts.

Nature Index spoke to researchers to get their suggestions for how to make abstracts eye-catching as well as accurate.

Carolina Quezada: Get writing practice as early as you can

Postdoctoral Fellow, Universidad Bernardo O’Higgins (Chile) and member of the eLife Early Career Advisory Group

A well-written abstract should highlight clearly and in an engaging way what is most special about the research findings to its potential audience. An excellent abstract should be interesting and accessible to all potential readers including non-experts.

Carolina Quezada

Carolina Quezada

It is important for scientists to get practice writing abstracts as early as possible and seek out formal training opportunities within their schools and professional networks. Even if one writes well in technical and academic language, it does not necessarily make one able to communicate science properly to non-experts, and this skill is becoming more valued.

Regarding that, journals have started introducing ‘layman abstracts’, which are written for the public and researchers who are new to the field. I find them particularly useful because more people can better appreciate the value of the research.

At the eLife Early Career Advisory Group, we have also led efforts to involve more early-career researchers in editing and peer reviews, and I hope more journals can consider having similar initiatives. When researchers are able to get more experience reading, comparing and evaluating abstracts, they can also develop into better writers, and that benefits the entire scientific community.

Simone Schürle-Finke: Don’t overhype your research; know the purpose of your abstract

Group Head, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich (Switzerland)

An abstract helps to draw attention to a manuscript and there may be pressure to overhype the findings. A good abstract should avoid that; one way to do so is to be quantitative. In my papers , I like to make use of numbers to state findings or compare my technology with state-of-the-art techniques.

Simone Schürle-Finke

Simone Schürle-Finke

I also find it most helpful to write an abstract after the main body of a manuscript is written. At this stage of paper writing, I am very familiar with the narrative and data and will be able to take a step back to look at the big picture. This can help me summarise key findings of my paper and their limitations so I can communicate them in the abstract accurately.

Researchers write abstracts for many purposes and it is important to differentiate them as they can differ in their emphasis. When I write a paper abstract, there is greater focus on the findings. On the other hand, for a grant abstract, when the purpose is to get funding, the emphasis is on specific aims and potential implications of the project. A well-written abstract needs to be able to capture the essence of its purpose.

Esra Senol: Seek advice from peers and learn from published work

PhD student, National University of Singapore

A challenge I face while writing abstracts is not knowing how much background to include. Some journals provide specific information such as how many lines for background introduction in abstract, but most don’t. To overcome this challenge, I try to get feedback from my inner circle, such as colleagues in the same field and peers who are outside my field.

Esra Senol

I find suggestions from non-expert scientists helpful because as experts of a field, I may have technical blind spots. Editors who decide whether to send papers out for peer review may not be experts in my field. Getting advice from non-expert researchers has enabled me to better communicate the value of my research through abstracts.

Researchers can face difficulties writing in English especially when it is not their first language. Although my scientific training is in English, I realise that I may not always express myself as well as native writers. To improve my abstract writing skills, I would read many top, highly-cited papers in my field and also learn from published work in the journals I am targeting to submit to.

  • Contact AAPS
  • Get the Newsletter

Association for Advancing Participatory Sciences

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!

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.

How to Write an Abstract

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

upload-your-document-ai-proofreader

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.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing - try for free!

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

Try for free

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.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

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 February 25, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/abstract/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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.

Enago Academy

Important Tips for Writing an Effective Conference Abstract

' src=

Academic conferences are an important part of graduate work. They offer researchers an opportunity to present their work and network with other researchers. So, how does a researcher get invited to present their work at an academic conference ? The first step is to write and submit an abstract of your research paper .

The purpose of a conference abstract is to summarize the main points of your paper that you will present in the academic conference. In it, you need to convince conference organizers that you have something important and valuable to add to the conference. Therefore, it needs to be focused and clear in explaining your topic and the main points of research that you will share with the audience.

The Main Points of a Conference Abstract

There are some general formulas for creating a conference abstract .

Formula : topic + title + motivation + problem statement + approach + results + conclusions = conference abstract

Here are the main points that you need to include.

The title needs to grab people’s attention. Most importantly, it needs to state your topic clearly and develop interest. This will give organizers an idea of how your paper fits the focus of the conference.

Problem Statement

You should state the specific problem that you are trying to solve.

The abstract needs to illustrate the purpose of your work. This is the point that will help the conference organizer determine whether or not to include your paper in a conference session.

You have a problem before you: What approach did you take towards solving the problem? You can include how you organized this study and the research that you used.

Important Things to Know When Developing Your Abstract

Do your research on the conference.

You need to know the deadline for abstract submissions. And, you should submit your abstract as early as possible.

Do some research on the conference to see what the focus is and how your topic fits. This includes looking at the range of sessions that will be at the conference. This will help you see which specific session would be the best fit for your paper.

Select Your Keywords Carefully

Keywords play a vital role in increasing the discoverability of your article. Use the keywords that most appropriately reflect the content of your article.

Once you are clear on the topic of the conference, you can tailor your abstract to fit specific sessions.

An important part of keeping your focus is knowing the word limit for the abstract. Most word limits are around 250-300 words. So, be concise.

Use Example Abstracts as a Guide

Looking at examples of abstracts is always a big help. Look at general examples of abstracts and examples of abstracts in your field. Take notes to understand the main points that make an abstract effective.

Avoid Fillers and Jargon

As stated earlier, abstracts are supposed to be concise, yet informative. Avoid using words or phrases that do not add any specific value to your research. Keep the sentences short and crisp to convey just as much information as needed.

Edit with a Fresh Mind

After you write your abstract, step away from it. Then, look it over with a fresh mind. This will help you edit it to improve its effectiveness. In addition, you can also take the help of professional editing services that offer quick deliveries.

Remain Focused and Establish Your Ideas

The main point of an abstract is to catch the attention of the conference organizers. So, you need to be focused in developing the importance of your work. You want to establish the importance of your ideas in as little as 250-300 words.

Have you attended a conference as a student? What experiences do you have with conference abstracts? Please share your ideas in the comments. You can also visit our  Q&A forum for frequently asked questions related to different aspects of research writing, presenting, and publishing answered by our team that comprises subject-matter experts, eminent researchers, and publication experts.

' src=

best article to write a good abstract

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

Enago Academy's Most Popular

abstract in research paper

  • Manuscript Preparation
  • Publishing Research
  • Reporting Research

Role of an Abstract in Research Paper With Examples

Why does one write an abstract? What is so intriguing about writing an abstract in…

graphical abstract vs video abstract

Graphical Abstract Vs. Video Abstract-Which Is Better?

With scientific journals’ migration to digital platforms, accessing scientific literature has become easier than ever.…

lack of literature review

3 Quick Tips on How Researchers Can Handle Lack of Literature in Original Research

Many a times, I have heard fellow researchers saying that they were unable to find…

Latin Terms

  • Manuscripts & Grants

How to Turn Your Thesis Into a Journal Article

In many cases, publishing thesis is often one of the requirements for graduate students to…

thesis advisor

  • Career Corner
  • PhDs & Postdocs

When Your Thesis Advisor Asks You to Quit

I was two months into the third year of my PhD when it happened. In…

Virtual Defense: Top 5 Online Thesis Defense Tips

3 Critical Tips to Maximize Your Potential As an Academic Researcher

How to Get Hired in Your Dream Positions: 4 Quick Tips for Enterprising Researchers!

how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

  • 2000+ blog articles
  • 50+ Webinars
  • 10+ Expert podcasts
  • 50+ Infographics
  • 10+ Checklists
  • Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

When should AI tools be used in university labs?

how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

How to Write a Conference Abstract

What is a conference abstract, why submit a conference abstract.

  • Finding Conferences
  • Abstract Preparation
  • How to Write a Scientific or Research Abstract
  • How to Write a Case Report Abstract
  • How to Write a Quality Improvement Project Abstract
  • Writing Tips
  • Reasons for Rejection

A conference abstract is a short proposal you write when you want to have a chance to share your research at a conference. For medical conferences, presenters usually either give a podium presentation (just talking in front of an audience about their research) or they present a poster. 

Here are some of the benefits of submitting a conference abstract:

  • It's a good addition to your CV and resume
  • It may be published in the conference proceedings
  • It could be a basis for future publication
  • Garners recognition from colleagues online and through social media
  • Helps you make connections through networking at the conference
  • Helps you meet potential employers at the conference
  • Next: Finding Conferences >>
  • 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

Twitter Icon

Need help? Email us at [email protected]

How to Write an Abstract for Presentation at a Scientific Meeting

Affiliation.

  • 1 Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine and Respiratory Care Services, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. [email protected].
  • PMID: 37193598
  • PMCID: PMC10589105 (available on 2024-11-01 )
  • DOI: 10.4187/respcare.11101

Presenting research at scientific meetings is an important part of the dissemination of research findings. Abstracts are an abbreviated form of a research study presented at a meeting of a professional society. Common elements include background, methods, results, and conclusions. Each section should be carefully written to maximize the chances of acceptance. This paper will cover how to write an abstract for a presentation at a scientific meeting and common mistakes that authors make when writing abstracts.

Keywords: abstract; national meeting; research; research methodology; respiratory care.

Copyright © 2023 by Daedalus Enterprises.

U.S. flag

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
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • v.25(3); 2014 Oct

Logo of ejifcc

How to Write a Scientific Paper: Practical Guidelines

Edgard delvin.

1 Centre de recherche, CHU Sainte-Justine

2 Département de Biochimie, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada

Tahir S. Pillay

3 Department of Chemical Pathology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria

4 Division of Chemical Pathology, University of Cape Town

5 National Health Laboratory Service, CTshwane Academic Division, Pretoria, South Africa

Anthony Newman

6 Life Sciences Department, Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Precise, accurate and clear writing is essential for communicating in health sciences, as publication is an important component in the university criteria for academic promotion and in obtaining funding to support research. In spite of this, the development of writing skills is a subject infrequently included in the curricula of faculties of medicine and allied health sciences. Therefore clinical investigators require tools to fill this gap. The present paper presents a brief historical background to medical publication and practical guidelines for writing scientific papers for acceptance in good journals.

INTRODUCTION

A scientific paper is the formal lasting record of a research process. It is meant to document research protocols, methods, results and conclusions derived from an initial working hypothesis. The first medical accounts date back to antiquity. Imhotep, Pharaoh of the 3 rd Dynasty, could be considered the founder of ancient Egyptian medicine as he has been credited with being the original author of what is now known as the Edwin Smith Papyrus ( Figure 1 ). The Papyrus, by giving some details on cures and anatomical observations, sets the basis of the examination, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of numerous diseases. Closer to the Common Era, in 460 BCE, Hippocrates wrote 70 books on medicine. In 1020, the Golden age of the Muslim Culture, Ibn Sina, known as Avicenna ( Figure 2a ), recorded the Canon of medicine that was to become the most used medical text in Europe and Middle East for almost half a millennium. This was followed in the beginning of the 12 th Century bytheextensivetreatiseofMaimonides( Figure 2b ) (Moses ben Maimon) on Greek and Middle Eastern medicine. Of interest, by the end of the 11 th Century Trotula di Ruggiero, a woman physician, wrote several influential books on women’s ailment. A number of other hallmark treatises also became more accessible, thanks to the introduction of the printing press that allowed standardization of the texts. One example is the De Humani Corporis Fabrica by Vesalius which contains hundreds of illustrations of human dissection. Thomas A Lang provides an excellent concise history of scientific publications [ 1 ]. These were the days when writing and publishing scientific or philosophical works were the privilege of the few and hence there was no or little competition and no recorded peer reviewing system. Times have however changed, and contemporary scientists have to compose with an increasingly harsh competition in attracting editors and publishers attention. As an example, the number of reports and reviews on obesity and diabetes has increased from 400 to close to 4000/year and 50 to 600/year respectively over a period of 20 years ( Figure 3 ). The present article, essentially based on TA Lang’s guide for writing a scientific paper [ 1 ], will summarize the steps involved in the process of writing a scientific report and in increasing the likelihood of its acceptance.

This manuscript, written in 1600 BCE, is regarded as a copy of several earlier works ( 3000 BCE). It is part of a textbook on surgery the examination, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of numerous ailments. BCE: Before the Common Era.

The Edwin Smith Papyrus (≈3000 BCE)

Figure 2a Avicenna 973-1037 C.E.Figure 2b Maimonides, 1135-1204 C.E.

Avicenna and Maimonides

Orange columns: original research papers; Green columns: reviews

Annual publication load in the field of obesity and diabetes over 20 years.

Reasons for publishing are varied. One may write to achieve a post-graduate degree, to obtain funding for pursuing research or for academic promotion. While all 3 reasons are perfectly legitimate, one must ask whether they are sufficient to be considered by editors, publishers and reviewers. Why then should the scientist write? The main reason is to provide to the scientific community data based on hypotheses that are innovative and thus to advance the understanding in a specific domain. One word of caution however, is that if a set of experiments has not been done or reported, it does not mean that it should be. It may simply reflect a lack of interest in it.

DECIDING ON PUBLISHING AND TARGETING THE JOURNAL

In order to assist with the decision process, pres-ent your work orally first to colleagues in your field who may be more experienced in publishing. This step will help you in gauging whether your work is publishable and in shaping the paper.

Targeting the journal, in which you want to present your data, is also a critical step and should be done before starting to write. One hint is to look for journals that have published similar work to yours, and that aims readers most likely to be interested in your research. This will allow your article to be well read and cited. These journals are also those that you are most likely to read on a regular basis and to cite abundantly. The next step is to decide whether you submit your manuscript to a top-ranking impact factor journal or to a journal of lower prestige. Although it is tempting to test the waters, or to obtain reviewers comments, be realistic about the contribution your work provides and submit to a journal with an appropriate rank.

Do not forget that each rejection delays publication and that the basin of reviewers within your specialty is shallow. Thus repeated submission to different journals could likely result in having your work submitted for review to the same re-viewer.

DECIDING ON THE TYPE OF MANUSCRIPT

There are several types of scientific reports: observational, experimental, methodological, theoretical and review. Observational studies include 1) single-case report, 2) collective case reports on a series of patients having for example common signs and symptoms or being followed-up with similar protocols, 3) cross-sectional, 4) cohort studies, and 5) case-control studies. The latter 3 could be perceived as epidemiological studies as they may help establishing the prevalence of a condition, and identify a defined population with and without a particular condition (disease, injury, surgical complication). Experimental reports deal with research that tests a research hypothesis through an established protocol, and, in the case of health sciences, formulate plausible explanations for changes in biological systems. Methodological reports address for example advances in analytical technology, statistical methods and diagnostic approach. Theoretical reports suggest new working hypotheses and principles that have to be supported or disproved through experimental protocols. The review category can be sub-classified as narrative, systematic and meta-analytic. Narrative reviews are often broad overviews that could be biased as they are based on the personal experience of an expert relying on articles of his or her own choice. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are based on reproducible procedures and on high quality data. Researchers systematically identify and analyze all data collected in articles that test the same working hypothesis, avoiding selection bias, and report the data in a systematic fashion. They are particularly helpful in asking important questions in the field of healthcare and are often the initial step for innovative research. Rules or guidelines in writing such report must be followed if a quality systematic review is to be published.

For clinical research trials and systematic reviews or meta-analyses, use the Consort Statement (Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials) and the PRISMA Statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) respectively [ 2 , 3 ]. This assures the editors and the reviewers that essential elements of the trials and of the reviews were tackled. It also speeds the peer review process. There are several other Statements that apply to epidemiological studies [ 4 ], non-randomized clinical trials [ 5 ], diagnostic test development ( 6 ) and genetic association studies ( 7 ). The Consortium of Laboratory Medicine Journal Editors has also published guidelines for reporting industry-sponsored laboratory research ( 8 ).

INITIAL STEPS IN THE PROCESS OF WRITING A SCIENTIFIC DOCUMENT

Literature review is the initial and essential step before starting your study and writing the scientific report based on it. In this process use multiple databases, multiple keyword combinations. It will allow you to track the latest development in your field and thus avoid you to find out that someone else has performed the study before you, and hence decrease the originality of your study. Do not forget that high-ranking research journals publish results of enough importance and interest to merit their publication.

Determining the authorship and the order of authorship, an ethical issue, is the second essential step, and is unfortunately often neglected. This step may avoid later conflicts as, despite existing guidelines, it remains a sensitive issue owing to personal biases and the internal politics of institutions. The International Committee of Medical Editors has adopted the following guidelines for the biomedical sciences ( 9 ).

“Authorship credit should be based only on: 1) Substantial contributions to the conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) Final approval of the version to be published. Conditions 1, 2 and 3 must be all met. Acquisition of funding, the collections of data, or general supervision of the research group, by themselves, do not justify authorship.” ( 9 , 10 )

The order of authorship should reflect the individual contribution to the research and to the publication, from most to least ( 11 ). The first author usually carries out the lead for the project reported. However the last author is often mistakenly perceived as the senior author. This is perpetuated from the European tradition and is discouraged. As there are divergent conventions among journals, the order of authorship order may or may not reflect the individual contributions; with the exception that the first author should be the one most responsible for the work.

WRITING EFFECTIVELY

Effective writing requires that the text helps the readers 1) understand the content and the context, 2) remember what the salient points are, 3) find the information rapidly and, 4) use or apply the information given. These cardinal qualities should be adorned with the precise usage of the language, clarity of the text, inclu-siveness of the information, and conciseness. Effective writing also means that you have to focus on the potential readers’ needs. Readers in science are informed individuals who are not passive, and who will formulate their own opinion of your writing whether or not the meaning is clear. Therefore you need to know who your audience is. The following 4 questions should help you writing a reader-based text, meaning written to meet the information needs of readers [ 12 ].

What do you assume your readers already know? In other words, which terms and concepts can you use without explanation, and which do you have to define?

What do they want to know? Readers in science will read only if they think they will learn something of value.

What do they need to know? Your text must contain all the information necessary for the reader to understand it, even if you think this information id obvious to them.

What do they think they know that is not so? Correcting misconceptions can be an important function of communication, and persuading readers to change their minds can be a challenging task.

WRITING THE SCIENTIFIC PAPER

Babbs and Tacker ’ s advice to write as much of the paper before performing the research project or experimental protocol may, at first sight, seem unexpected and counterintuitive [ 13 ], but in fact it is exactly what is being done when writing a research grant application. It will allow you to define the authorship alluded to before. The following section will briefly review the structure of the different sections of a manuscript and describe their purpose.

Reading the instructions to authors of the Journal you have decided to submit your manuscript is the first important step. They provide you with the specific requirements such as the way of listing the authors, type of abstract, word, figure or table limits and citation style. The Mulford Library of University of Toledo website contains instructions to authors for over 3000 journals ( http://mulford.meduoiho.edu/instr/ ).

The general organization of an article follows the IMRAD format (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion). These may however vary. For instance, in clinical research or epidemiology studies, the methods section will include details on the subjects included, and there will be a statement of the limitation of the study. Although conclusions may not always be part of the structure, we believe that it should, even in methodological reports.

The tile page provides essential information so that the editor, reviewers, and readers will identify the manuscript and the authors at a glance as well as enabling them to classify the field to which the article pertains.

The title page must contain the following:

  • The tile of the article – it is an important part of the manuscript as it is the most often read and will induce the interested readers to pursue further. Therefore the title should be precise, accurate, specific and truthful;
  • Each author’s given name (it may be the full name or initials) and family name;
  • Each author’s affiliation;
  • Some journals ask for highest academic degree;
  • A running title that is usually limited to a number of characters. It must relate to the full title;
  • Key words that will serve for indexing;
  • For clinical studies, the trial’s registration number;
  • The name of the corresponding author with full contact information.

The abstract is also an important section of your manuscript. Importantly, the abstract is the part of the article that your peers will see when consulting publication databases such as PubMed. It is the advertisement to your work and will strongly influence the editor deciding whether it will be submitted to reviewers or not. It will also help the readers decide to read the full article. Hence it has to be comprehensible on its own. Writing an abstract is challenging. You have to carefully select the content and, while being concise, assure to deliver the essence of your manuscript.

Without going into details, there are 3 types of abstracts: descriptive, informative and structured. The descriptive abstract is particularly used for theoretical, methodological or review articles. It usually consists of a single paragraph of 150 words or less. The informative abstract, the most common one, contains specific information given in the article and, are organized with an introduction (background, objectives), methods, results and discussion with or without conclusion. They usually are 150 to 250 words in length. The structured abstract is in essence an informative abstract with sections labeled with headings. They may also be longer and are limited to 250 to 300 words. Recent technology also allows for graphical or even video abstracts. The latter are interesting in the context of cell biology as they enable the investigator to illustrate ex vivo experiment results (phagocytosis process for example).

Qualities of abstracts:

  • Understood without reading the full paper. Shoul dcontain no abbreviations.lf abbreviations are used, they must be defined. This however removes space for more important information;
  • Contains information consistent with the full report. Conclusions in the abstract must match those given in the full report;
  • Is attractive and contains information needed to decide whether to read the full report.

Introduction

The introduction has 3 main goals: to establish the need and importance of your research, to indicate how you have filled the knowledge gap in your field and to give your readers a hint of what they will learn when reading your paper. To fulfil these goals, a four-part introduction consisting of a background statement, a problem statement, an activity statement and a forecasting statement, is best suited. Poorly defined background information and problem setting are the 2 most common weaknesses encountered in introductions. They stem from the false perception that peer readers know what the issue is and why the study to solve it is necessary. Although not a strict rule, the introduction in clinical science journals should target only references needed to establish the rationale for the study and the research protocol. This differ from more basic science or cell biology journals, for which a longer and elaborate introduction may be justified because the research at hand consists of several approaches each requiring background and justification.

The 4-part introduction consists of:

  • A background statement that provides the context and the approach of the research;
  • A problem statement that describes the nature, scope and importance of the problem or the knowledge gap;
  • An activity statement, that details the research question, sets the hypothesis and actions undertaken for the investigation;
  • A forecasting statement telling the readers whattheywillfìndwhen readingyourarticle [ 14 ].

Methods section

This section may be named “Materials and Methods”, “Experimental section” or “Patients and Methods” depending upon the type of journal. Its purpose to allow your readers to provide enough information on the methods used for your research and to judge on their adequacy. Although clinical and “basic” research protocols differ, the principles involved in describing the methods share similar features. Hence, the breadth of what is being studied and how the study can be performed is common to both. What differ are the specific settings. For example, when a study is conducted on humans, you must provide, up front, assurance that it has received the approval of you Institution Ethics Review Board (IRB) and that participants have provided full and informed consent. Similarly when the study involves animals, you must affirm that you have the agreement from your Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC). These are too often forgotten, and Journals (most of them) abiding to the rules of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) will require such statement. Although journals publishing research reports in more fundamental science may not require such assurance, they do however also follow to strict ethics rules related to scientific misconduct or fraud such as data fabrication, data falsification. For clinical research papers, you have to provide information on how the participants were selected, identify the possible sources of bias and confounding factors and how they were diminished.

In terms of the measurements, you have to clearly identify the materials used as well as the suppliers with their location. You should also be unambiguous when describing the analytical method. If the method has already been published, give a brief account and refer to the original publication (not a review in which the method is mentioned without a description). If you have modified it, you have to provide a detailed account of the modifications and you have to validate its accuracy, precision and repeatability. Mention the units in which results are reported and, if necessary, include the conversion factors [mass units versus “système international” (S.I.)]. In clinical research, surrogate end-points are often used as biomarkers. Under those circumstances, you must show their validity or refer to a study that has already shown that are valid.

In cases of clinical trials, the Methods section should include the study design, the patient selection mode, interventions, type of outcomes.

Statistics are important in assuring the quality of the research project. Hence, you should consult a biostatistician at the time of devising the research protocol and not after having performed the experiments or the clinical trial.

The components of the section on statistics should include:

  • The way the data will be reported (mean, median, centiles for continuous data);
  • Details on participant assignments to the different groups (random allocation, consecutive entry);
  • Statistical comparison tools (parametric or non parametric statistics, paired or unpaired t-tests for normally distributed data and so on);
  • The statistical power calculation when determining the sample size to obtain valid and significant comparisons together with the a level;
  • The statistical software package used in the analysis.

Results section

The main purpose of the results section is to report the data that were collected and their relationship. It should also provide information on the modifications that have taken place because of unforeseen events leading to a modification of the initial protocol (loss of participants, reagent substitution, loss of data).

  • Report results as tables and figures whenever possible, avoid duplication in the text. The text should summarize the findings;
  • Report the data with the appropriate descriptive statistics;
  • Report any unanticipated events that could affect the results;
  • Report a complete account of observations and explanations for missing data (patient lost).

The discussion should set your research in context, reinforce its importance and show how your results have contributed to the further understanding of the problem posed. This should appear in the concluding remarks. The following organization could be helpful.

  • Briefly summarize the main results of your study in one or two paragraphs, and how they support your working hypothesis;
  • Provide an interpretation of your results and show how they logically fit in an overall scheme (biological or clinical);
  • Describe how your results compare with those of other investigators, explain the differences observed;
  • Discuss how your results may lead to a new hypothesis and further experimentation, or how they could enhance the diagnostic procedures.
  • Provide the limitations of your study and steps taken to reduce them. This could be placed in the concluding remarks.

Acknowledgements

The acknowledgements are important as they identify and thank the contributors to the study, who do not meet the criteria as co-authors. They also include the recognition of the granting agency. In this case the grant award number and source is usually included.

Declaration of competing interests

Competing interests arise when the author has more than one role that may lead to a situation where there is a conflict of interest. This is observed when the investigator has a simultaneous industrial consulting and academic position. In that case the results may not be agreeable to the industrial sponsor, who may impose a veto on publication or strongly suggest modifications to the conclusions. The investigator must clear this issue before starting the contracted research. In addition, the investigator may own shares or stock in the company whose product forms the basis of the study. Such conflicts of interest must be declared so that they are apparent to the readers.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Thomas A Lang, for his advice in the preparation of this manuscript.

Conferences

Explore new frontiers in biology and medicine, conference list, past meetings, how to register, invitation letter, submit an abstract, poster display guidelines, view abstracts, cancellations and transfers, order an abstract booklet, submit a conference concept, why participate, tips on writing a high-quality abstract.

NCBI/NIH Guide to Writing a Scientific Abstract:   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3732725/

The key goal of an abstract is to clearly and succinctly describe the relevance, details, and excitement of your research project. The abstract should be interesting and informative and should also be easily understood by scientists who are not familiar with your area of study. It is preferable to use simple declarative sentences and to avoid the use of the passive voice. It also helps to avoid, or minimize, the use of abbreviations and acronyms. Where abbreviations and acronyms are essential, they should be spelled out on the first instance. Plan on your abstract being approximately 2500 characters in length. It should begin with the list of author names and institutions, then conclude with an acknowledgement of the funding source(s) that supported the work.

The basic elements of an abstract are the title, hypothesis, methods, results, and conclusions. The title should be brief, but clearly convey the central message of the study. In fact, it should be possible to understand the entire point of the study from the title alone. The hypothesis, or aim of the study, should be stated in the first two or three sentences of the abstract and be presented in the context of critical background information (i.e., studies or data that inspired the current hypothesis). This should be followed by brief and basic information on the experimental approach and the types of measurements that were made. In the case of clinical studies, it is a good idea to state whether the study was retrospective or prospective, and whether there was randomization. The results (they can be preliminary) should be summarized clearly and avoid the inclusion of detailed data sets or lists of numbers. The results should also be presented with the hypothesis in mind to make it easy for the reader to understand how the data impact the hypothesis (i.e., avoid presenting data that don't specifically address the hypothesis). Finally, there should be a clear interpretation of the data as they relate to the original hypothesis and perhaps a statement on the significance of the resulting scientific advance. A statement on possible future directions can also be included, if appropriate.

It is a good idea to have a colleague review your work to spot mistakes and to check for syntax and sense. Remember, a well-written abstract will convey key information to scientists within the field, yet be readily understood by scientists in other areas. Aesthetics matter as well; make it easier on your reader by dividing the abstract into a few paragraphs. And nothing mars an otherwise excellent abstract more than careless typing or proofreading, so be sure to spell-check for typos and ensure you have employed consistent formatting throughout.

From the KeyPoint Blog

10 min read, michelson awards luncheon features rising stars in vaccinology & immunology.

May 31, 2022 by Shannon Weiman

On Friday June 3, as part of the Progress in Vaccine Development for Infectious Diseases Keystone Symposia in...

NIH Careers Roundtable- Free ePanel on Demand

May 3, 2022 by Shannon Weiman

Graduate students often debate whether to go into academia or industry after they earn their Ph.D. But there is a third...

Subscribe for Updates

IMAGES

  1. How To Write An Effective Research Paper Abstract For College: 4 Types

    how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

  2. Writing a Conference Abstract (Cheat Sheet)

    how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

  3. How to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference

    how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

  4. How to Write a Good Abstract

    how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

  5. How to Write an Abstract for a Research Paper

    how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

  6. How to Write an Abstract

    how to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation pmc (nih gov)

VIDEO

  1. How to Write a scientific Manuscript with the help of AI ?

  2. Writing an Impressive Abstract

  3. How to write a good abstract

  4. HOW TO WRITE ABSTRACT IN A RESEARCH PAPER

  5. How to write an abstract for a research paper

  6. Abstract

COMMENTS

  1. How to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference presentation

    Journal List Indian J Psychiatry v.53 (2); Apr-Jun 2011 PMC3136027 As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. Learn more: PMC Disclaimer | PMC Copyright Notice

  2. How to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference

    DOI: 10.4103/0019-5545.82558 s of scientific papers are sometimes poorly written, often lack important information, and occasionally convey a biased picture. This paper provides detailed suggestions, with examples, for writing the background, methods, results, and conclusions sections of a good abstract. The primary target of t …

  3. PDF Writing an Abstract for a Conference Presentation

    • "The abstract is a brief, clear summary of the information in your presentation. A well-prepared abstract enables readers to identify the basic content quickly and accurately, to determine its relevance to their interests or purpose and then to decide whether they want to listen to the presentation in its entirety." University of Minnesota

  4. The Writing Center

    1. The abstract leaves out results if the study is unfinished prior to submission: X The results are inconclusive at this time. (What are the expected results for your study?) Babies are expected to stare longer at the monitor when they hear sounds they are familiar with than when the sounds are unfamiliar. 2.

  5. Writing the title and abstract for a research paper: Being concise

    The "abstract" needs to be simple, specific, clear, unbiased, honest, concise, precise, stand-alone, complete, scholarly, (preferably) structured, and should not be misrepresentative. The abstract should be consistent with the main text of the paper, especially after a revision is made to the paper and should include the key message prominently.

  6. Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

    An abstract is a short summary of your (published or unpublished) research paper, usually about a paragraph (c. 6-7 sentences, 150-250 words) long. A well-written abstract serves multiple purposes: an abstract lets readers get the gist or essence of your paper or article quickly, in order to decide whether to read the full paper;

  7. PDF How to Write a Successful Abstract for a Public Health Conference

    Understand the purpose of a scientific abstract; Describe the structure of a scientific abstract and the writing approaches for each section; Discuss "tricks of the trade" to improve chances for abstract acceptance. Write an abstract for submission to an upcoming public health conference! Call for Abstracts: Nov. 1, 2019 - Jan. 10, 2020.

  8. How to Write an Abstract for a Scientific Paper

    Write in the third person. Replace phrases like "I found" or "we examined" with phrases like "it was determined" or "this paper provides" or "the investigators found". Write the abstract and then pare it down to meet the word limit. In some cases, a long abstract will result in automatic rejection for publication or a grade!

  9. How to write an abstract that stands out

    The brevity of an abstract belies its importance to a manuscript. It's what catches a reader's attention and helps them to decide whether a paper is relevant. Yet failing to reflect the ...

  10. Doing Science: Writing conference abstracts

    When you're writing your abstract, then, keep in mind two very important things: 1) the abstract should show that you have something to say (the data you want to present); and 2) the abstract should attract readers to attend your presentation - it is your only chance to reach most of the delegates. Writing a typical abstract

  11. How do I write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference

    1. To write a good abstract, you need to be precise with your writing. Sum up these 5 things for the best abstract for your research. 2. For more tips on making it effective, click here:...

  12. Twelve tips to write an abstract for a conference: advice for young and

    Usually an abstract contains the following: title, background/introduction, objectives, methods, results, and conclusion; however, this format varies across conferences. Pay close attention to information such as word limit and how the abstract should be structured.

  13. How to Write a Really Great Presentation Abstract

    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 ...

  14. How to Write an Abstract

    Step 2: Methods. 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.

  15. Important Tips for Writing an Effective Conference Abstract

    Formula: topic + title + motivation + problem statement + approach + results + conclusions = conference abstract Here are the main points that you need to include. Title The title needs to grab people's attention. Most importantly, it needs to state your topic clearly and develop interest.

  16. How to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference

    Article. Oct 2023. Mary Beth Farrell. View. ... Editors are emphasizing that a good abstract explains the aims of the research, how these were met, and the main findings. 17 The general consensus ...

  17. How to prepare and submit abstracts for scientific meetings

    Go to: INTRODUCTION Submitting abstracts for meetings is useful for communicating the first results of a new study, just as submitting scientific articles to journals for publication is the best way of communicating the final results of a study.

  18. Research Guides: How to Write a Conference Abstract: Home

    A conference abstract is a short proposal you write when you want to have a chance to share your research at a conference. For medical conferences, presenters usually either give a podium presentation (just talking in front of an audience about their research) or they present a poster. Why Submit a Conference Abstract?

  19. How to Write an Abstract for Presentation at a Scientific Meeting

    Author Andrew G Miller 1 Affiliation 1 Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine and Respiratory Care Services, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. [email protected]. PMID: 37193598 DOI: 10.4187/respcare.11101

  20. How to write a good abstract for a scientific paper or conference ...

    INTRODUCTION. This paper is the third in a series on manuscript writing skills, published in the Indian Journal of Psychiatry.Earlier articles offered suggestions on how to write a good case report,[] and how to read, write, or review a paper on randomized controlled trials.[2 3] The present paper examines how authors may write a good abstract when preparing their manuscript for a scientific ...

  21. How to Write a Scientific Paper: Practical Guidelines

    The present article, essentially based on TA Lang's guide for writing a scientific paper [ 1 ], will summarize the steps involved in the process of writing a scientific report and in increasing the likelihood of its acceptance. Figure 1. The Edwin Smith Papyrus (≈3000 BCE) Figure 2.

  22. Tips For Writing a High-Quality Abstract

    Plan on your abstract being approximately 2500 characters in length. It should begin with the list of author names and institutions, then conclude with an acknowledgement of the funding source (s) that supported the work. The basic elements of an abstract are the title, hypothesis, methods, results, and conclusions.