Are you interested in contributing to HLWIKI International? contact
To browse other articles on a range of HSL topics, see the A-Z index.
- 20 October 2014
See also Critical appraisal | Research Portal for Academic Librarians | Research methods | Scholarship 2.0 | Scientific journal
A structured abstract is a commonly-used form of scientific communication used to report research findings to the scientific community. The structured abstract can be used in librarianship. The format is widely-used in biomedicine, allied health and health librarianship to present research quickly and concisely. Structured abstracts typically follow a standard boilerplate design where the goals and objectives of the research are listed, the methods that were used to carry out the investigation and brief sections on discussing the findings of the research (and, in a conclusion, their implications). Structured abstracts help authors to organize their ideas, and to present them with clarity and in an organized manner.
Parts of a structured abstract
Here are nine (9) possible sections of a structured abstract which can be adapted for your purposes and research:
- Abstract - a short summary of the article
- Keywords - words that describe key aspects of the article
- Introduction and statement of problem - identifies the need for the research question. In rigorous research, may include a hypothesis which is supported or refuted accordingly
- Review of the literature - places the work in context
- Methodology - explains the methods so others can replicate the study
- Data collection - describes the process and points out potential omissions
- Analysis - examines data by qualitative or quantitative means, states whether research question or hypothesis was proven or disproven
- Conclusions and recommendations for further research - accounts for results, suggests explanations, points out things that may have been overlooked, and suggests areas for futher research
- References - a list of research consulted.
- Source: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/policy/structured_abstracts.html
Health librarians' research
A summary of the advantages of structured abstracts appeared in a Summer 2001 issue of Hypothesis, and by Bayley and Eldredge in 2003. The evidence to demonstrate the value of structured abstracts clearly points to advantages for searching and quickly extracting needed information from summaries, regardless of the exact headings used by a abstracting and indexing service. A 2003 MLA Annual Meeting strongly recommended the use of structured abstracts for members wishing to present papers or posters at MLA Annual Meetings. At their most basic form, structured abstracts organize and summarize a paper; here are some of the more commonly-used sections:
- Bayley L, Eldredge J. The structured abstract: an essential tool for researchers. Hypothesis. 2003;17(1):1,11-13.
- Beck SE, Manuel K. Practical research methods for librarians and information professionals. New York: Neal-Schuman, 2008.
- Booth A, O'Rourke AJ. The value of structured abstracts in information retrieval from MEDLINE. Health Libraries Review. 1997;14(3):157-166.
- Falagas ME, Vergidis PI. Addressing the limitations of structured abstracts. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141(7):576-7.
- Fontelo P, Gavino A, Sarmiento RF. Comparing data accuracy between structured abstracts and full-text journal articles: implications in their use for informing clinical decisions. Evid Based Med. 2013 Jun 20.
- Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J. 2009 Jun;26(2):91-108.
- Hartley J. Current findings from research on structured abstracts: an update. J Med Libr Assoc. 2014 Jul;102(3):146-8.
- Hartley J. Current findings from research on structured abstracts. J Med Libr Assoc. 2004;92(3):368-71.
- Hartley J, Sydes M, Blurton A. Obtaining information accurately and quickly: are structured abstracts more efficient? J Info Sci. 1996;22(5):349-356.
- Hartley J, Sydes M. Are structured abstracts easier to read than traditional ones? J Research Reading. 1997;20(2):122-136.
- Hernon P, Schwartz C. Leadership: developing a research agenda for academic libraries. Libr Info Sci Res. 2008;30(4):243-249.
- Huth EJ. Structured abstracts for papers reporting clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 1987;106(4):626-7.
- Nakayama T, Hirai N, Yamazaki S. Adoption of structured abstracts by general medical journals and format for a structured abstract. J Med Libr Assoc. 2005;93(2):237-42.
- Ripple AM, Mork JG, Knecht LS, Humphreys BL. A retrospective cohort study of structured abstracts in MEDLINE, 1992-2006. J Med Libr Assoc. 2011;99(2):160-3.
- Sharma S, Harrison JE. Structured abstracts: do they improve the quality of information in abstracts? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130(4):523-30.
- Sollaci LB, Pereira MG. The introduction, methods, results and discussion (IMRAD) structure: a fifty-year survey. J Med Libr Assoc. 2004;92(3):364-7.
- Stevenson HA, Harrison JE. Structured abstracts: do they improve citation retrieval from dental journals? J Orthod. 2009;36(1):52-60.
- Wong HL. Quality of structured abstracts of original research articles in the British Medical Journal, the Canadian Medical Association Journal and the Journal of the American Medical Association: a 10-year follow-up study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2005;21(4):467-73.