Research letter: How should abridged scientific articles be presented in journals? A survey of readers and authors |
| |
Authors: | Marcus Müllner Fabian Waechter Sara Schroter and Barbara Squire |
| |
Institution: | Marcus Müllner, Fabian Waechter, Sara Schroter, and Barbara Squire |
| |
Abstract: | SEVERAL SCIENTIFIC AND GENERAL MEDICAL JOURNALS publish full-length articles on their Web sites and abridged versions in their print journals. We surveyed a stratified random sample of BMJ readers and authors to elicit their preferred format for the abridged print version. Each participant received a research paper abridged in 3 different formats: conventional abridged version, journalistic version and enhanced-abstract version. Overall, 45% (95% confidence interval CI] 42%–48%) of the respondents said they liked the conventional version most, 31% (95% CI 28%–34%) preferred the journalistic version and 25% (95% CI 22%–27%) preferred the enhanced-abstract version. Twenty-eight percent (95% CI 25%–32%) indicated that use of the journalistic format for abridged articles would very likely stop them from submitting papers to BMJ, and 13% (95% CI 11%–16%) said the use of the enhanced-abstract version would stop them from submitting to BMJ. Publishers of general medical journals who publish shortened articles should consider that authors and readers prefer a more conventional style of abridged papers. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|