![Criteria of an Abstract
Introduction (3 sentences): -
1. What is the research question?
2. Explain why investigating this question is important.
Methodology/Theoretical Framework (3 sentences): -
The research is conducted utilizing [describe the methodology or theoretical framework being employed].
Results (Actual, Preliminary, Expected) (3 sentences): -
a. What do the results of your studies suggest? [summary of findings]
b. What are the implications?
c. What will you do in the future? [mention future actions or research directions]
Significance (2 sentences)
a. Elaborate on the significance of the findings. [importance or impact of the results in 1-2 sentences]
b. Additionally, a brief description of Table 1 is provided, illustrating [brief description of the table or figure].
Why did you start?
What did you do?
What did you find?
What does it mean?](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/presentationakash-240327162128-bdd0b9dc/85/How-to-Develop-an-Abstract-Crafting-Impactful-Summaries-4-320.jpg)
How to Develop an Abstract: Crafting Impactful Summaries
- 1. How to Develop an Abstract Akash Roy 1 ©Akash Roy
- 2. What is an Abstract? Abstracts are concise summaries of presentations, workshops, or posters. They help readers quickly grasp the main content and relevance of the work. Abstracts enable individuals to decide whether to engage further with the complete presentation. They are typically brief and informative, often subject to word limits. Abstracts aim to attract potential attendees by being captivating and informative.
- 3. Preparing to write an abstract… Clarify presentation objectives: Identify what you want to present and why it is relevant to the conference audience. Evaluate relevance: Assess whether your topic aligns with the conference's focus, and if it is timely, strategic, and significant. Consider suitability: Determine whether the conference is an appropriate platform for your content and if it fits both the audience and your goals. Theme alignment: Ensure that your topic relates to the conference theme, if applicable, as it may influence abstract selection. Manage deadlines: Note the abstract submission deadline and plan preparation timelines to avoid last-minute rushes and allow for editorial feedback if needed.
- 4. Criteria of an Abstract Introduction (3 sentences): - 1. What is the research question? 2. Explain why investigating this question is important. Methodology/Theoretical Framework (3 sentences): - The research is conducted utilizing [describe the methodology or theoretical framework being employed]. Results (Actual, Preliminary, Expected) (3 sentences): - a. What do the results of your studies suggest? [summary of findings] b. What are the implications? c. What will you do in the future? [mention future actions or research directions] Significance (2 sentences) a. Elaborate on the significance of the findings. [importance or impact of the results in 1-2 sentences] b. Additionally, a brief description of Table 1 is provided, illustrating [brief description of the table or figure]. Why did you start? What did you do? What did you find? What does it mean?
- 5. Breakdown part by part: 1. Title: • It should convey as much as possible about the context and aims of the study. • In general, it is preferable to make the title a description of what was investigated rather than to state the results or conclusions. • The abstract’s title should be easy for readers everywhere to understand. • Using clever wordplay may catch people's attention at first, but they can end up making the main topic seem unimportant in the long run.
- 6. 2. Authors: • Author lists are rough rank orders of the relative contributions of the persons named, with the exception that the senior author (the mentor) is often listed last. • In general, the author listed first is the person who conceived the study and did most of the creative work on the project. • Full names and formal credentials should be used rather than nicknames or job titles.
- 7. 3. Introduction or Background: • Clearly state the aim of the study and include a concise statement of the hypothesis. • Use hypotheses to guide scientific study towards truth, avoiding bias and preference. • A hypothesis, like whether device D is better or not, keeps researchers unbiased and focused on facts, not preferences.
- 8. 4. Methods: • Reviewers and editors often reject manuscripts due to deficiencies in this section. • In abstracts, methods must be concise, but readers should still understand the study's design, context, and inclusion criteria. • It's important to specify if a study involving human subjects was retrospective or prospective, and if randomization was used. • Abstracts should offer a clear summary of the study's methodology for readers to grasp its approach and scope.
- 9. 5. Results • Abstracts should clearly communicate the study's findings. Vague statements like "The findings will be presented" are inadequate. • It's crucial to provide the main results, including real data, not just subjective assessments. Even if no statistically significant differences were found, results related to the study's hypothesis and primary endpoints should be included. • A table or figure may be included in the abstract if it conveys the findings of the study more effectively than text alone.
- 10. 6. Conclusion or Discussion • The conclusions section should explain why the study's findings matter. • Don't exaggerate the importance of the data; keep conclusions realistic. • Make sure conclusions are backed by the study's results. • Don't stretch conclusions beyond the study's limits, like specific patient groups or treatment conditions.
- 11. Example 1: Effectiveness of Rehabilitation Interventions on Functional Recovery in Stroke Survivors Example 2: Nonparametric Behrens-Fisher Problem with Dependent Replicates Idea Courtesy: Dr. Beall
- 12. First Draft: Example 1 Introduction: Stroke is a leading cause of long-term disability worldwide, and rehabilitation interventions play a crucial role in improving functional outcomes for stroke survivors. However, there is a need to comprehensively evaluate the effectiveness of various rehabilitation strategies to inform clinical practice and optimize patient outcomes. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the impact of rehabilitation interventions on functional outcomes in stroke survivors. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched for relevant studies published between 2010 and 2020. Functional outcomes assessed using standardized measures such as the Modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Barthel Index, and Functional Independence Measure (FIM) were considered as primary outcomes. Lacks explicit mentions of the gap in current knowledge or specific focus of the review the search strategy lacks detail, including specific keywords and terms used
- 13. First Draft: Example 1 Continuation… Results: A total of 50 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results indicated a significant improvement in functional outcomes following rehabilitation interventions compared to control conditions (p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed that multidisciplinary rehabilitation programs were associated with the greatest improvements in functional independence, followed by occupational therapy and physical therapy. However, no significant difference was found in the effectiveness of speech therapy compared to control conditions. Discussion: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis highlight the positive impact of rehabilitation interventions on functional outcomes in stroke survivors. Multidisciplinary approaches appear to be particularly effective in enhancing functional independence post-stroke. The results section presents the main findings of the meta- analysis concisely but lacks specific details on effect sizes or confidence intervals more context on the clinical relevance and potential limitations of the study
- 14. Reconstructed: Example 1 Title: Effectiveness of Rehabilitation Interventions on Functional Outcomes in Stroke Survivors Introduction: Stroke-induced disabilities pose significant challenges to the quality of life for survivors worldwide, necessitating effective rehabilitation interventions. Despite their importance, there remains a need to systematically evaluate the efficacy of various rehabilitation strategies in optimizing functional outcomes among stroke survivors. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the impact of rehabilitation interventions on functional outcomes in stroke survivors. PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were systematically searched for relevant studies published between 2010 and 2020. Studies investigating the effects of rehabilitation interventions, including physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, and multidisciplinary rehabilitation programs, were included. Functional outcomes, measured through standardized scales such as the Modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Barthel Index, and Functional Independence Measure (FIM), were considered as primary endpoints.
- 15. Reconstructed: Example 1 Continuation… Results: Fifty studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Our findings demonstrated a significant improvement in functional outcomes following rehabilitation interventions compared to control conditions (p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed that multidisciplinary rehabilitation programs yielded the most substantial enhancements in functional independence, followed by occupational therapy and physical therapy. However, speech therapy did not show a significant difference compared to control conditions. Table 1: Summary of Included Studies and Key Findings Discussion: Our systematic review and meta-analysis underscore the positive impact of rehabilitation interventions on functional outcomes in stroke survivors. Specifically, multidisciplinary approaches demonstrate superior effectiveness in enhancing post-stroke functional independence. However, further research is warranted to elucidate the optimal timing, intensity, and duration of rehabilitation interventions to maximize their benefits for stroke survivors, thus informing clinical practice and enhancing patient outcomes. Study Rehabilitation Intervention Functional Outcome Measure Effect Size (95% CI) Study 1 Multidisciplinary Barthel Index 0.72 (0.60-0.84) Study 2 Physical therapy Functional Independence Measure 0.55 (0.40-0.70) Study 3 Occupational therapy Modified Rankin Scale 0.68 (0.50-0.86) Study 4 Speech therapy Barthel Index 0.12 (-0.05-0.29)
- 16. Draft: Example 2 Introduction: Statistical comparison of two independent groups is one of the most frequently occurring inference problems in scientific research. Most of the existing methods available in the literature are not applicable when measurements are taken with dependent replicates, for example when visual acuity or any blood parameters of mice sharing the same cage are measured. In all these scenarios the replicates should neither be assumed to be independent nor be observations coming from different subjects. Furthermore, using a summary measure of the replicates as a single observation would decrease precision of the effect estimates and thus decrease the powers of the test procedures. Thus, there is a need for purely nonparametric flexible methods that can be used for analyzing such data in a unified way. Ranking procedures are known to be a robust and powerful statistical analysis tool for which parametric distributional assumptions are doubtful. Methods: So, a solution is proposed for these two sample problems with correlated replicates. The results achieved in our work generalize the ideas on previous attempts for testing the rather strict hypothesis H0: F1 = F2 or even for testing H0: p = ½. In comparison to the existing pioneering works, differently weighted estimators of the treatment effect p as well as unbiased variance estimators will be proposed in the current work. Therefore, it is of major interest to estimate the treatment effect and to test whether there is any significant difference between these two groups along with the computation of a confidence interval. Too large "purely nonparametric flexible methods" may need further clarification or examples for better understanding. should specify why parametric distributional assumptions are doubtful and how ranking procedures address this issue. Clarification needed by explaining the rationale behind using differently weighted estimators and how they improve upon existing methods.
- 17. Draft: Example 2 Continuation… Results: Weighted as well as unweighted versions of the estimators of the treatment effects are investigated and their asymptotic distributions are derived in a closed form. Furthermore, major attention will be given to the accuracy of the tests in terms of controlling the nominal type-I error level as well as their powers when sample size are rather small. Here, it will be shown that the distributions of the tests can be approximated using t-distributions with approximated Satterthwaite-Welch degrees of freedom. Discussion: Application of this method is extensively shown in two different toxicological studies involving small sample sizes and different numbers of dependent replicates per unit. could be clearer if it specifies what is meant by "weighted" and "unweighted" versions and how they differ in terms of practical application. needs further explanation to clarify how the proposed method aligns with the Brunner-Munzel test. could be improved by providing a summary of the findings or insights gained from these applications.
- 18. Timeline Requirements 1-2 days Review the guidelines provided by the conference, journal, or instructor to understand the specific requirements for the abstract. Key Points 2-3 days Review your research or project to identify the main objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. •Highlight the most significant findings or contributions of your work. Draft 3-5 days Begin drafting the abstract by summarizing each key aspect of your research or project. •Ensure that the abstract is concise, clear, and coherent, with a logical flow of information. Feedback 1-2 days Share your draft abstract with colleagues, mentors, or peers for feedback. •Incorporate their suggestions for improvement, focusing on clarity, relevance, and impact. Revise & Finalize 2-3 days Revise the abstract based on the feedback received, paying attention to language, grammar, and formatting. Submission 1 day before deadline Submit the finalized abstract before the deadline, following the submission instructions provided by the conference, journal, or instructor.
- 19. Summary • Seed of Idea: Like a seed, the research begins with an idea or question. • Germination of Concept: The abstract takes shape as the idea develops. • Rooting in Literature: It establishes its foundation by reviewing relevant literature. • Stemming Structure: The abstract outlines methodology, theory, and outcomes. • Leafing Out Results: Results emerge, enriching the abstract. • Flowering Conclusion: It reaches full form with conclusions and future directions. • The fruition of Impact: Finally, it conveys significance and impact. ©Akash Roy ©Akash Roy
- 20. Thank you! Happy Writing Akash Roy royak@musc.edu ©Akash Roy ©Akash Roy