医学论文优秀英语摘要的写作及难句翻译

医学论文优秀英语摘要的写作及难句翻译 医学论文英语摘要的写作及难句翻译 来源:赛恩斯 [摘要]根据自己在编审医学论文英文摘要工作中的实际 经验 班主任工作经验交流宣传工作经验交流材料优秀班主任经验交流小学课改经验典型材料房地产总经理管理经验 ，总结和归纳在翻译医学论文摘要时应注意的问 题 快递公司问题件快递公司问题件货款处理关于圆的周长面积重点题型关于解方程组的题及答案关于南海问题 及使用的 方法 快递客服问题件处理详细方法山木方法pdf计算方法pdf华与华方法下载八字理论方法下载 、策略，重点论述医学论文英文摘要的写作格式、文章标题的表达方式、语态和时态的使用、长难句翻译等。 [关键词]医学论文;英语摘要;写作;翻译 为繁荣医学教育，提高医疗水平，传播医学知识，促进同国外的医学交流，推动医学科学的进步，我国目前已出版发行了数百种医学期刊。为了方便论文的检索和查阅，保持同国外医学期刊的一致性，医学论文大多要求书写中、英文摘要。笔者在医学期刊的英文编辑工作中发现，相当一部分摘要的书写不够 规范 编程规范下载gsp规范下载钢格栅规范下载警徽规范下载建设厅规范下载 ，部分作者在遇到长句及疑难 句子 关于阅读的唯美句子关于古风的唯美句子执行力的经典句子鼓励人努力奋斗的句子用沉默代替一切的句子 时就不知从何下手，有的将检索的外文资料生搬硬抄，同自己的原文完全不对应。笔者特撰写此文，以期对提高广大医务工作者书写英文摘要的水平、提高医学论文的质量有所帮助。 1 英文摘要的写作格式 医学论文摘要的格式目前主要采用结构式摘要(structured abstract)，它是由加拿大Mc Master大学临床流行病学和生物统计学教授Haynes博士于1990年4月首先提出的。而几乎在同年，美国《内科学纪事》(Annals of Internal Medicine'Ann Inte rn Med)在国际上率先应用结构式摘要，随之，世界各国的医学期刊都采用了结构式摘要。这些结构式摘要有8段式、7段式、6段式、5段式、4段式及3段式等，内容主要包括研究目的、研究设计、研究单位、研究对象或病人、处理方法、检测方法、结果及结论共8项。而在实际应用中，8段式结构式摘要逐渐简化为4段式。我国大多数医学期刊都采用了4段式结构式摘要，即目的、方法、结果和结论。(1)目的(objective):简要说明研究的目的，表明研究的范围、内容和重要性，常常涵盖文章的标题内容。(2)方法(methods):简要说明研究课题的设计思路，使用何种材料和方法，如何对照分组，如何处理数据等。(3)结果(results):简要介绍研究的主要结果和数据，有何新发现，说明其价值及局限。此外，还要给出结果的置信值，统计学显著性检验的确切值。(4)结论(conclusion):简要对以上的研究结果进行分析或讨论，并进行总结，给出符合科学规律的结论。为了更好地说明问题，我们来看下例:(1)目的:探讨螺旋CT(SCT)对结、直肠癌术前分期的价值。(2)方法:51例疑诊结、直肠肿瘤的患者行SCT扫描，扫描前清洁肠道，并经直肠注气，扫描范围从膈顶至耻骨联合。51例中，41例经直肠镜或手术病理证实为结、直肠癌，其中31例有手术、SCT等完整资料参与分期研究，将影像诊断与手术病理结果进行对照。(3) 结果:SCT总的分期准确率为58.1%(18/31)，判断T分期的准确率为84.4%(27/32)'N分期的准确率为61.3%(19/31)。评价肿瘤 浆膜外侵犯的敏感性和特异性分别为92.9%和50.0%。(4)结论:SCT扫描对结、直肠癌的术前分期有重要价值，有助于判 断肿瘤浆膜外侵犯及区域淋巴结和远处转移情况。其对应的英文摘要为:(1)Objective:To evaluate spiral CT (SCT) in th e preoperative staging of colorectal carcinomas. (2)Methods:Fifty?one patients suspicious of having colorectal carcinoma underwent spiral CT scans performed from the dome of the diaphragm to symphysis pubica after cleansing enema and rectal air insufflation. 41 of the 51 patients were proved to have colorectal carcinoma by colonoscopy and/or pathology. The find ings of SCT of 31 patients treated with surgery were compared with the surgical pathological examination for staging.(3)R esults:The overall accuracy rate of SCT staging was 58.1%(18/31). For evaluation of T staging and N staging'the accuracy rates were 84.4%(27/32) and 61.3%(19/31). Sensitivity and specificity for serosal infiltration were 92.9% and 50.0%.(4)Co nclusion:SCT scan'playing a significant role in the preoperative staging of colorectal carcinoma'is useful to detect the serosa l infiltration'lymph node and distant metastasis.上述摘要中英文对应准确，叙述简练，基本上概括了全文的主要内容，便于专 家和编辑的审稿和校对，也便于医务工作者以及普通读者的查阅和检索。 2 英文摘要写作与翻译 应注意的问题众所周知，任何英文书面材料只有用英文思维、构思、写作，才可能成为比较地道的英文文章，医学论文 摘要也是这样，最好直接用英文书写。然而笔者在实际工作中以及同论文作者的交流中了解到，80%以上的医务工作者不能做 到这一点。他们基本上要首先写出中文摘要，再按照中文内容翻译成英文。在写作和翻译的过程中，他们不可避免地都会犯 下一些错误。下面将重点讨论摘要写作与翻译中应注意的问题。 2.1 文章标题文章标题具备信息功能(提供文章的主要内容)、祈使功能(吸引读者阅读和购买)、美感功能(简单明了、 新颖、醒目)和检索功能(方便读者和科技工作者检索、查阅及引用)。医学论文的标题还有它自己的特点，即有较多的专 业术语和较长的字数。对于它们的翻译，要忠实于原文，一般都采用直译方法，并且要注意各成分之间的关系。请看下例:“针 刺对冠心病心绞痛患者左心功能状态的影响”翻译:The acupuncture effect on left ventricular function in patients with coronary heart disease and angina pectoris分析:“影响”为中心词，但它在本文中的意思为“疗效”，因为“针刺”是种治疗疾病的方法， “针刺的疗效”可译为“acupuncture effect”。“左心功能状态”是表类属的定语，应紧跟“影响”，“患者”修饰“左心功能状态”，“冠 心病心绞痛”修饰“患者”。层层修饰关系在译文中均以介词连接，译文简洁而明晰。 2.2 语态在英语中，被动语态的使用远不及主动语态广泛。然而，在翻译医学论文摘要时，却常常采用第三人称的被动语态。这是因为医学研究着重于客观事物和过程的描述，使得整项活动更显出科学性。同时，被动语态的句子在结构上有较大的调节余地，有利于采用必要的修辞手段，扩大句子的信息量，从而突出重要的概念、问题、事实、结论等内容。请看下例:“采用Western blotting技术检测37例食管鳞状细胞癌组织、癌旁组织、区域淋巴结和相应正常食管组织中P73蛋白的表达，并探讨与食管临床病理特征的关系。”翻译:The expression of P73 protein was detected by Western blotting in 37 cases of esophageal tumor tissues'para?cancer tissues'regional lymphnodes and matched esophageal normal tissues'and their relation to clinical pathologic characteristics of esophageal cancer was explored.分析:(P73蛋白的)“表达”和“关系”是两个中心词，只有使用被动语态，才能突出这两个词。“检测”和“探讨”都是科学研究的过程，使用被动语态就是强调其科学性。整个译句使用被动语态达到的效果是结构紧凑，上下联贯。 2.3 时态时态是大多数作者遇到的一大难题，他们不知何时该用何种时态。有时全文从头到尾只用一种时态，或几种时态杂乱交错，给人不知所云的感觉。笔者通过多年对医学论文英文摘要的加工、翻译发现'医学论文摘要中所采用的时态主要是一般现在时和一般过去时，偶尔也会出现完成时。而它们的功能也很明确，即，一般现在时(偶尔有现在完成时)使用于摘要的目的与结论当中。对于摘要的目的，现在常常省略主语，只用不定式短语进行表达。如“to study; to evaluate; to understand”等;而一般过去时(偶尔有过去完成时)则常常用于摘要的方法和结果之中。请看下例:例1:“106例宫颈癌均行广泛性子宫切除和盆腔淋巴结清除术，其中78例行术前放疗(体外加腔内放疗)，16例采用腔内放疗加手术，12例术后放疗。”翻译:106 patients with cervical carcinoma were all treated by radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy'of whom 78 had preoperative radiotherapy'(external radiation and brachytherapy)'16 combination of brachytherapy and radical operation'12 adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy.分析:上文是摘要“方法”中的一句。主句使用了过去时，从句则使用了过去完成时。之所以使用这两种时态，是因为在撰写此文时，研究工作已经结束，研究过程中所做的一切已成过去。读者阅过就一目了然。例2:“初步结果显示肝素酶基因表达可能为肺癌细胞获得转移活性的可靠标志之一，其检测可用于辅助判断肺癌患者预后。”翻译:The preliminary results suggest that the expression of heparanase gene may be one of the reliable markers for the metastasti c activity gained by the lung cancer cells and can be used clinically in predicting the prognosis of patients.分析:这是摘要“结论”中的一句，是论文作者对研究工作进行的总结，并指出其对当前实际工作的指导意义，因此使用的是一般现在时。当然，使用何种时态不能一概而论。在翻译时，要根据原文中所要表达的意思来最后确定。 3 长、难句的翻译 不管是英语还是汉语医学文章，都有一个共同的特点，即它们的句子通常较长，结构较复杂，有时，长长的一段文字仅由一句话组成。在医学论文摘要中更是如此，要做好它们的互译还真不容易。这是因为汉语句子建构在意念主轴(thought?pivot)上'英语句子建构在形式(或主谓)主轴(form?pivot or subject?predict?pivot)上。也就是说，虽然句子是表达完整意义的语言单位，汉语强调的是意义，不太强调句子结构，许多句子没有主语，还有的句子主语不明显，但意义是明确的;而英语句子特别强调句子结构，绝大多数句子需要主语和谓语。这就要求在汉译英过程中注意句意的转换，学会抓找中心词和使用英语中的各个关联词。请看下列例子:例1:“以BPDE诱导恶性转化的人支气管上皮细胞株16HBE为模型，采用cDNA代表性差异分析方法，比较转化细胞及正常对照细胞间基因表达的差异，分离恶变细胞中差异表达的cDNA片段。”翻译:The malignant transformation of human bronchial cell line 16HBE induced by BPDE was used as a model for comparing gene expre ssion between the transformed cells and controls. cDNA representational difference analysis was performed to isolate differen tially expressed cDNA fragment in transformed cells.分析:在中文原句中，出现了“以……”、“采用……”以及“比较……”、“分离……”这两个看似并列的机构'如果按照原文翻译'就会不知所云。因此，根据句意和英语的句子结构，将原文分成两层意思，按照两个句子去翻译。在第一层意思中，“上皮细胞株”在句中是中心词，但在实际翻译中，应通过所有格形式将“恶性转化”处理为中心词。翻译时，将它们的位置颠倒过来，并且为了保持和中文“以…”结构相一致，使用了被动语态。第二层意思中，“cDNA代表性差异分析方法”是中心词。其他结构按照英文习惯出现，层次分明，出落自然，毫无累赘之感。例2:“这些感受器是神经末梢，它们嵌入血管壁，根据该血管扩张的程度发出冲动。”翻译:These receptors are nerve endings that dischar ge impulses according to the extent of stretch in the wall of the vessels in which they are imbedded.分析:原文虽然不是太长'但如果按照中文结构去译'就显得很幼稚。因此'就应使用英语中的各个关联词及关联结构。本句中采用的是定语分译法'即用一个主句带上一个定语从句'该定语从句又带上它自己的定语从句'这不仅符合英文习惯'而且逻辑性很强。整个译文层次明晰、流畅自然。以上是笔者在工作中的一些探索'希望能对进行医学论文英语摘要写作的医务工作者有所启发。 Structured Abstracts Printer-friendly Version What are Structured Abstracts? A structured abstract is an abstract with distinct, labeled sections (e.g., Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion) for rapid comprehension (see Example 1). Example 1: Am J Infect Control. 2008 Mar;36(2):118-22. Risk factors and mortality in patients with nosocomial staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Wang FD, Chen YY, Chen TL, Liu CY. Section of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan. fdwang@vghtpe.gov.tw BACKGROUND: Infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus have become increasingly common in hospitals worldwide. S aureus continues to be a cause of nosocomial bacteremia. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical significance (mortality) of MRSA and methicillin-susceptible S aureus bacteremia in a retrospective cohort study in a 2900-bed tertiary referral medical center. Survival and logistic regression analyses were used to determine the risk factors and prognostic factors of mortality. RESULTS: During the 15-year period, 1148 patients were diagnosed with nosocomial S aureus bacteremia. After controlling potential risk factors for MRSA bacteremia on logistic regression analysis, service, admission days prior to bacteremia, age, mechanical ventilator, and central venous catheter (CVC) were independent risk factors for MRSA. The crude mortality rate of S aureus bacteremia was 44.1%. The difference between the mortality rates of MRSA (49.8%) and MSSA bacteremia (27.6%) was 22.2% (P < .001). Upon logistic regression analysis, the mortality with MRSA bacteremia was revealed to be 1.78 times higher than MSSA (P < .001). The other predicted prognostic factors included age, neoplasms, duration of hospital stay after bacteremia, presence of mechanical ventilator, and use of CVC. CONCLUSIONS: Resistance to methicillin was an important independent prognostic factor forpatients with S aureus bacteremia. PMID: 18313513 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] What Kinds of Structures are used? Standardized formats for structured abstracts have been defined for original research studies, review articles and clinical practice guidelines (1,2). The IMRAD format (INTRODUCTION, METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION), a defacto standard that reflects the process of scientific discovery (3), is commonly used as a structure for journal abstracts (4,5). The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) Group has recently issued a new guideline for reporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in journal and conference abstracts by developing a minimum list of essential items that authors should consider when reporting the main results of a RCT in any journal or conference abstract. CONSORT for Abstracts recommends that abstracts relating to RCTs have a structured format (6). Why Use Structured Abstracts? Structured abstracts have several advantages for authors and readers. These formats were developed in the late 1980s and early 1990s to assist health professionals in selecting clinically relevant and methodologically valid journal articles. They also guide authors in summarizing the content of their manuscripts precisely, facilitate the peer-review process for manuscripts submitted for publication, and enhance computerized literature searching (1,2). The National Library of Medicine (NLM) studied structured abstracts in MEDLINE? from 1989-1991 and published an article characterizing structured abstracts by examining the occurrence of structured abstracts; characteristics of MEDLINE records with structured abstracts; editorial policies of selected MEDLINE journals, and a random sample of structured abstracts (7). Plans are underway to update NLM research on structured abstracts in MEDLINE/PubMed?. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE, of which NLM is a sitting member), whose "Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals" document provides general guidelines for the format of manuscripts submitted to journals, endorses the use of structured abstracts. ICMJE does acknowledge the format required for structured abstracts differs from journal to journal and that some journals use more than one structure (8). NLM Formatting of Structured Abstracts NLM uses all uppercase letters for the labels that appear in structured abstracts in MEDLINE/PubMed citations (see Example 1). Adoption of structured abstracts by general medical journals and * format for a structured abstract ABSTRACT Background: The use of a structured abstract has been recommended in reporting medical literature to quickly convey necessary information to editors and readers. The use of structured abstracts increased during the mid-1990s; however, recent practice has yet to be analyzed. Objectives: This article explored actual reporting patterns of abstracts recently published in selected medical journals and examined what these journals required of abstracts (structured or otherwise and, if structured, which format). Methods: The top thirty journals according to impact factors noted in the “Medicine, General and Internal” category of the ISI Journal Citation Reports (2000) were sampled. Articles of original contributions published by each journal in January 2001 were examined. Cluster analysis was performed to classify the patterns of structured abstracts objectively. Journals' instructions to authors for writing an article abstract were also examined. Results: Among 304 original articles that included abstracts, 188 (61.8%) had structured and 116 (38.2%) had unstructured abstracts. One hundred twenty-five (66.5%) of the abstracts used the introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) format, and 63 (33.5%) used the 8-heading format proposed by Haynes et al. Twenty-one journals requested structured abstracts in their instructions to authors; 8 journals requested the 8-heading format; and 1 journal requested it only for intervention studies. Conclusions: Even in recent years, not all abstracts of original articles are structured. The eight-heading format was neither commonly used in actual reporting patterns nor noted in journal instructions to authors. INTRODUCTION To assist clinicians in quickly finding articles that are both scientifically sound and applicable to their practices, the Ad Hoc Working Group for Critical Appraisal of the Medical Literature proposed, in 1987, a seven-heading format for informative abstracts in clinical articles [1, 2]. Accepting Altman's proposal [3], Haynes et al., in 1990, revised the format and content requirements for structured abstracts to an eight-heading format (objective, design, setting, patients, intervention, main outcome measures, results, and conclusions for original articles) [4]. In 1993, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (the so-called “Vancouver group”) recommended, in the “Uniform Requirements for Journals Submitted to Biomedical Journals,” the use of structured abstracts [5]. Following these proposals, medical journals in Europe and the United States have tried to provide more informative abstracts for articles of clinical interest. Whether the adoption of structured abstracts could improve the quality of articles continues to be controversial [6, 7]. However, it is certain that structured abstracts make it easier for clinical readers to select appropriate articles more quickly and facilitate peer review before publication. Secondary journals like the ACP Journal Club, published by the American College of Physicians, are recognized as valued information resources for practicing evidence-based medicine [8] and have adopted structured abstracts. Harbourt et al. [9] reviewed articles listed on MEDLINE from 1989 to 1991 and found 3,873 articles that included structured abstracts; both the number of articles with structured abstracts and the number of journals publishing them had increased. Kulkarni [10] reported that 28.5% of clinical trial reports listed on MEDLINE in the first half of the 1990s included structured abstracts and that number continued to increase to 71% by the latter half of 1995. Even in non-English-speaking countries, increasingly more journals are adopting structured abstracts; however, the number of structured abstracts provided by journals differs significantly between countries [11, 12]. The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) format [13, 14] and the eight-heading format are well known for structured abstracts in original articles. However, no recent data exist on how many journals provide structured abstracts and what abstract format is required. No systematic research has been conducted on the content of the journals' instructions for authors regarding structured abstracts. This study was conducted to find out how many original articles published in well-known medical journals included structured abstracts, to identify the formats of such structured abstracts, and to see what abstract format the journals required, structured or otherwise, and, if structured, which format. METHODS The top thirty journals according to impact factors noted in the “Medicine, General and Internal” category of ISI's Journal Citation Reports (2000) were selected. Although impact factors are not directly related to journal quality [15, 16], they can be used as an objective selection criteria for journals given that they reflect a journal's impact in terms of how often it is cited. An investigation was conducted to identify how many of these journals provided structured abstracts as of January 2001. Because four journals (Annual Review of Medicine, Amyloid, Annals of Medicine, and British Medical Bulletin) had an insufficient number of original articles in the January 2001 issue, the investigation continued into February 2001. PubMed was used to extract the abstracts to examine their formats. To eliminate manuscripts that were not original, the following categories were excluded from the search: “review,” “meta-analysis,” “historical article,” “legal cases,” “consensus development conference,” “comment,” “guideline,” “practice guideline,” and “biography.” “Meta-analysis” articles resemble original contributions more than traditional narrative reviews. A six-heading format of structured abstracts for review research [4], which is nearly equivalent to a “systematic review” or a “meta-analysis,” was assessed independently from original articles. The authors excluded “meta-analysis” in the present examination to focus on the format of structured abstracts in original articles. A search formula was created as follows: Journal name [ta] AND 2001/01["] NOT (review[pt] OR meta-analysis[pt] OR historical article[pt] OR legal cases[pt] OR consensus development conference[pt] OR comment[pt] OR guideline[pt] OR practice guideline[pt] OR biography[pt]) To classify the abstract patterns objectively, the authors conducted a cluster analysis (Ward's method) of the structured abstracts extracted from PubMed using statistical software (JMP, SAS Institute). The journals' instructions for authors concerning the format of abstracts were obtained from each journal or collected from Websites in February 2002. RESULTS We retrieved a total of 467 hits from 27 journals. No original articles were retrieved from the Annual Review of Medicine, Proceedings of the Association of American Physicians, or Archives of Family Medicine using the above search. The first two journals mainly published papers other than original contributions, and the Archives of Family Medicine ended in 2000. Among them, 304 articles included abstracts, 188 (61.8%) of which were structured, while 116 (38.2%) were unstructured ). Abstracts provided by the New England Journal of Medicine, British Medical Journal, and 2 other journals were structured, and 70% or more of those in the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA), The Lancet, and 7 other journals were structured. Twenty of the 21 abstracts provided by JAMA were structured (formats with 8 headings), and 19 of the 21 abstracts provided by The Lancet were structured (IMRAD format). In 5 of the journals, fewer than 70% of the abstracts were structured. All abstracts provided by Medicine, Amyloid, and 6 other journals were unstructured. Various patterns were observed in the 188 structured abstracts retrieved from our search, and the structured formats varied even in the same journal. Thirty-one headings were identified from the structured abstracts, which were examined and summarized into 11 categories ). Headings such as “method and results,” which obviously included 2 different headings in 1, were counted as 2 different headings. Using a dendrogram built by cluster analysis, the structured abstracts were categorized into formats with 8 headings (and their variations) and the IMRAD format (and its variations). Results showed that 125 (66.5%) of the 188 structured abstracts adopted the IMRAD format, and 63 (33.5%) adopted the format with 8 headings. Examination of the journals' instructions for authors indicated that eight journals, including JAMA and Annals of Internal Medicine, used the eight-heading format, while thirteen journals, including the New England and The Lancet, used the IMRAD format. Six other Journal of Medicine journals, including the Annual Review of Medicine and Medicine, did not specifically recommend the use of a structured format. No articles were retrieved via PubMed from the following three journals: Proceedings of the Association of American Physicians, Archives of Family Medicine, and British Medical Bulletin; their instructions for authors were also not available. Twenty-six of the twenty-seven journals examined provided abstracts conforming to the instructions for authors. The Journal of Family indicated eight-heading abstracts were to be used, but three out Practice of the four abstracts retrieved were IMRAD format. DISCUSSION The relationship between the 8-heading format and the IMRAD format is shown in . The 8-heading format requests authors of articles to specify and detail their research design and results [4]. In structured abstracts, authors are asked to describe their research's limitations [17], which are occasionally obscured in the traditional narrative format of abstracts. Accordingly, diffusion of structured abstracts in medical journals, to rapidly convey necessary information for clinical application, can be said to reflect readers' needs rather than those of authors. For a medical librarian or an informationist, structured abstracts are easier to read and facilitate a quicker assessment of relevant clinical articles expected by clinicians. In light of the proposals noted in the “Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals” [5], more journals are expected to adopt structured abstracts. However, more than 30% of articles from the top 30 journals did not include structured abstracts in this study. One possible reason for journals not adopting structured abstracts is traditional space constraints for a single article, as narrative abstracts generally increase in length once modified to conform to the structured format [1]. Another reason may be that journals are reluctant to obligate authors to present their study's weak points by writing structured abstracts A limited number of journals had only structured abstracts. Among the 304 articles that included abstracts, 61.8% were structured. Sixty-seven percent of the structured abstracts used the IMRAD format, while the 8-heading format was not widely used. Results of the cluster analysis indicated that the IMRAD format mainly included the headings “method(s),” “results,” and “conclusion.” Variations of the IMRAD format also included “objective(s), aim, or purpose”; “patients, participants, population, subjects, and material(s)”; and “discussion, recommendation, or interpretation.” As for the format with 8 headings, “results” and “conclusion(s)” were the only categories generally used. Three additional categories were also identified among those using variations of the 8-heading format; these included “context,” “patient,” and “main outcome measures”; “objective(s),” “intervention(s),” and “main outcome measure(s)”; and “objective(s),” “patients,” and “main outcome measure(s).” Structured abstracts, particularly those with an eight-heading format, are assumed to be more suitable for interventional studies than for observational studies [7]. However, when our search was limited to “clinical trials” by using PubMed's publication type, we retrieved only a few clinical trials . Therefore, we could assume that the eight-heading format, if modified appropriately, could also be applied to abstracts for observational study reports. When the heading of “intervention” is not applied in a cohort study that aims to explore the risk factors of a certain disease, “none” or “not applied” can be included. However, it may be rather difficult to describe the “main outcome measures” in an observational study, which are more exploratory in nature than hypothesis testing. Further discussion is needed to address this issue. In only eight journals of the present study did the instructions for authors recommend the use of the eight-heading format, and, for the most part, abstract formats conformed to the journals' instructions for authors. In light of differences in time of submission, acceptance, and publication and time of examination of the instructions for authors (February 2002), the present findings did not address the question of whether the abstract formats of published articles were consistent with the instructions for authors. Because abstract formats are influenced by the publishing journal, the instructions for authors and processes of review and editing play important roles in promoting appropriate abstract formats. As for those abstracts that do not conform to the instructions for authors, two possibilities exist. One is that the abstract was submitted, reviewed, and edited before the instructions for authors had been revised and released, and the other is that the abstract format recommended in the instructions for authors might have been inappropriate for the abstract's contents. Although instructions for authors are essential for controlling the quality of abstracts, their limitations result from being provided prior to article submission. Pitkin and Branagan [18] conducted a study to find out whether giving specific instructions to authors after submission of articles could improve the quality of abstracts in the next submission but were unable to prove the effectiveness of such instructions. Nevertheless, their study emphasized the importance of giving specific and detailed attention to abstracts during the editing process. Abstracts summarize the information provided in original articles. Improvement in the quality of abstracts would be beneficial to authors, readers, and editors. Further possible studies in this area are: attitudes of journal editors, readers, and authors toward using structured abstracts; reasons why some abstracts do not conform to journals' instructions for authors; desirable abstract formats for observational studies, qualitative research, or case reports; possibilities of incorporating information standardized in structured abstracts into a larger database or a decision-support system; and more. We believe that it would be valuable for established journals to recognize how structured abstracts can improve the quality of their publications Why abstraction? The Structured Abstract: An Essential Tool for Researchers By now, most health sciences librarians are well aware of structured abstracts. Since the 1,2introduction of this convention for summarizing clinical research in 1987 structured abstracts have become the predominant mode of abstract found in the major clinical journals. Many behavioral, social, biological, and basic medical sciences journals are now also following the convention of structured abstracts. In their most basic form, structured abstracts organize their summaries of publications with the following headings: , OBJECTIVE , METHODS , RESULTS , CONCLUSIONS (1)目的(objective):Envisioning Your Research Question简要说明研究的目的，表明研究的范 围、内容和重要性。 Way of writing: present tense. 一般现在时(偶尔有现在完成时)使用于摘要的目的与结论当中。 对于摘要的目的，现在常常省略主语，只用不定式短语进行表达。如“to study; to evaluate; to understand”等 To demonstrate how this program (name) was a success in achieving its five goals. Objective:To evaluate spiral CT (SCT) in the preoperative staging of colorectal carcinomas探讨螺旋CT(SCT)对 结、直肠癌术前分期的价值。 (2)方法(methods):Documenting Your Research Steps简要说明研究课题的设计思路，使用何 种材料和方法，如何对照分组，如何处理数据等。 The METHODS section in a structured abstract should accurately, although concisely, summarize how you will proceed in learning the answer to your question. METHODS headings are sometimes brief: , Prospective cohort study , Randomized controlled trial , Series of three focus groups These brief descriptions often communicate a great deal because of the specific meanings attached to these shorthand descriptions of study designs. A handbook of research methods or two probably will suggest the type of methods that might be appropriate for answering your question and suggest some instruments you might use to gather information. Way of writing: Active an passive voice. Present and past tenses.;一般过去时(偶尔有过去完成 时)则常常用于摘要的方法和结果之中。请看下例:例1:“106例宫颈癌均行广泛性子宫切 除和盆腔淋巴结清除术，其中78例行术前放疗(体外加腔内放疗)，16例采用腔内放疗加手 术，12例术后放疗。”翻译:106 patients with cervical carcinoma were all treated by radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy'of whom 78 had preoperative radiotherapy'(external radiation and brachytherapy)'16 combination of brachytherapy and radical operation'12 adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy.分析:上文是摘要“方法”中的一句。主句使用了过去时，从句则使用 了过去完成时。之所以使用这两种时态，是因为在撰写此文时，研究工作已经结束，研究过 程中所做的一切已成过去 Fifty one patients suspicious of having colorectal carcinoma underwent spiral CT scans performed from the dome of the diaphragm to symphysis pubica after cleansing enema and rectal air insufflation. 41 of the 51 patients were proved to have colorectal carcinoma by colonoscopy and/or pathology. The findings of SCT of 31 patients treated with surgery were compared with the surgical pathological examination for staging. 51例疑诊结、直肠肿瘤的患者行SCT扫描，扫描前清洁肠 道，并经直肠注气，扫描范围从膈顶至耻骨联合。51例中，41例经直肠镜或手术病理证实为 结、直肠癌，其中31例有手术、SCT等完整资料参与分期研究，将影像诊断与手术病理结果 进行对照。 (3)结果(results):Reporting Your Research简要介绍研究的主要结果和数据，有何新发现，说 明其价值及局限。此外，还要给出结果的置信值，统计学显著性检验的确切值。The RESULTS section of the structured abstract reports what you have discovered. It will probably report that you only made a modest discovery or perhaps some unexpected results. Contrary to popular belief, when conducted correctly most solid research often does not report any dramatic or surprising results. The overall accuracy rate of SCT staging was 58.1%(18/31). For evaluation of T staging and N staging’ the accuracy rates were 84.4%(27/32) and 61.3%(19/31). Sensitivity and specificity for serosal infiltration were 92.9% and 50.0%. SCT总的分期准确率为58.1%(18/31)，判断T分期的 准确率为84.4%(27/32)'N分期的准确率为61.3%(19/31)。评价肿瘤浆膜外侵犯的敏感性和特异 性分别为92.9%和50.0%。 (4)结论(conclusion):简要对以上的研究结果进行分析或讨论，并进行总结，给出符合科学 规律的结论。The CONCLUSION should not introduce any information or ideas not already described elsewhere in your structured abstracts. Ideally, it should be only one or two sentences in length, and can include an evaluation of your research and areas for further research Some clinical journals include structured abstracts with variations on these headings. For example, some will use headings such as: Context, Background, Aim, Findings, and Interpretation. Some additional headings include: Design, Population, Setting, Participants, Intervention (method), Main Outcome Measures and other aspects relevant to the research. A summary of the advantages of structured abstracts appears in the Summer 2001 issue of 34-6Hypothesis. The evidence points in particular to advantages for searching and quickly 7extracting needed information from these types of summaries, regardless of the exact headings use by a journal. No wonder then that structured abstracts are gaining popularity. The MLA Annual Meeting for 2003 strongly recommends use of structured abstracts; participants wishing to present papers or posters at the 2004 MLA Annual Meeting will be required to submit their entries in structured abstract format. Fortunately, preparing structured abstracts also can help you from the very outset of contemplating your research, progressing through the research process itself, and culminating in its final reporting to your colleagues. This article shows you how. Conferences & Meetings MLA 2010 Annual Meeting and Exhibition MLA’s annual meeting is an opportunity to present and discuss papers, posters, applied research, and important issues in health sciences information management. The event gives MLA members and affiliated professionals a chance to share ideas, hear from experts, see the latest products, network, and socialize! Join more than 2,000 health information professionals May 15–20, 2010, in Washington, D.C., for the premier event of the year! Download the MLA '10 Call for Participation! About the Medical Library Association Contact MLA Headquarters Staff For your convenience, please contact the following staff members for information on the services listed. Call headquarters 9:00 A.M.–5:00 p.m., central time, Monday–Friday; fax us anytime; or address surface mail to the address below. Medical Library Association 65 East Wacker Place, Suite 1900 Chicago, IL 60601-7246 Tel., 312.419.9094 Fax, 312.419.8950 info@mlahq.org OBJECTIVE: Envisioning Your Research Question Do you have a research idea? Not sure where to start? The structured abstract can guide your thinking at the very beginning. Consider the overall purpose of your research. What are you trying to learn or to demonstrate? Such questions are the beginnings of a hypothesis. Here are some generic examples of research questions: , What made our program a success? , Which form of teaching results in students searching effectively? , Which information resources are used the most? There are many types of other questions you can entertain. For an inventory of research questions already developed by a worldwide collaboration of health sciences librarians see the Spring 2001 89issue of Hypothesis. Advice on formulating questions can be found elsewhere. In addition, please see Bayley et al’s examples of alternatives to the more conventional formats for structured 10abstracts. An increasing number of journals are allowing authors to begin their structured abstracts under the heading QUESTION. Should you choose a more traditional approach, however, you can convert your question into a statement under the headings of OBJECTIVE. Consider how the questions above become converted to OBJECTIVE statements: , To demonstrate how this program (name) was a success in achieving its five goals. , To determine if teaching MEDLINE by the _____ method results in second year medical students retaining 90% of the search skills learned after three months duration. , To measure electronic resources usage at the ______ Library and Informatics Center over the 2001-2002 period as a means of predicting future use. Note how these research questions became more refined in the process of stating them clearly for the structured abstract. Research questions typically become more focused as one writes up the proposal in structured abstract form. Normally research questions also become more specific and detailed during this process. The content to be drafted in the METHODS and RESULTS sections will anticipate the actual research project in the initial stages. This might be the moment when you decide to submit your structured abstract for consideration as a presentation or poster at a professional meeting such as the MLA Annual Meeting. Your eventual research project need not be tied absolutely to what you propose, but the more you can clarify what methods you think will be needed and what results you anticipate while still in the proposal stage, the easier your work will be later. Clarification also will attract colleagues with similar interests. METHODS: Documenting Your Research Steps Now that you have determined what you want to research or demonstrate, how will you proceed? The METHODS section in a structured abstract should accurately, although concisely, summarize how you will proceed in learning the answer to your question. METHODS headings are sometimes brief: , Prospective cohort study , Randomized controlled trial , Series of three focus groups These brief descriptions often communicate a great deal because of the specific meanings attached to these shorthand descriptions of study designs. A handbook of research methods or two probably will suggest the type of methods that might be appropriate for answering your question and suggest some instruments you might use to gather information. Some authors substitute the term DESIGN for methods in their structured abstracts. Because questions vary and the designs have relative validity you also might want to consult a table of Evidence-Based 11Librarianship (EBL) Levels of Evidence for ideas. As your research inquiry proceeds, you will find that your methods become more specific. Even the most experienced researchers must fine-tune their methods as practical issues arise. As you contemplate what method to use, you might find it easier to identify two other elements found in some structured abstracts: SETTING and POPULATION. Most health sciences librarianship/informatics research includes these components. And, by thinking about the parameters of your setting or the exact criteria of who will be included (and who will be excluded) in your population, you begin to clarify your research project that much further. SETTING headings might be followed by the following sample statements: , A small library with one librarian and two technicians serving a 400-bed hospital. , A small research library that serves an MRI research facility owned by a healthcare corporation. , An academic health sciences library serving a school of medicine, a college of nursing, and two allied health sciences programs POPULATION headings might precede the following types of concise, but descriptive text: , First-year medical students with no previous formal MEDLINE training , Third-year internal medicine residents. , All users of an academic health sciences library , Physicians and research scientists Will your methods include an INTERVENTION or an EXPOSURE? These might be helpful headings to include in your structured abstract. These headings might, coincidentally, might help clarify the direction of your research. Experimental designs such as randomized controlled trials or observational designs such as the cohort studies usually utilize interventions or exposures respectively. An INTERVENTION usually has a specific research meaning. Some examples are: , Weeding according by _____, ______, and _____ criteria. , A 30-60 minute interview in the faculty members’ offices , A 120- minute in-depth MEDLINE training session for the study group whereas the control group received only a 15-minute overview session. The heading EXPOSURE also has a specific research design meaning. Some examples are: , Access to information resources during the 2002-2003 period , One 60-minute required training session on MEDLINE search strategies , Teamwork training lasting two days for all managers RESULTS: Reporting Your Research The RESULTS section of the structured abstract reports what you have discovered. It will probably report that you only made a modest discovery or perhaps some unexpected results. Contrary to popular belief, when conducted correctly most solid research often does not report any dramatic or surprising results. Even if you wonder, “Who cares?” while reviewing less than dramatic or unexpected results, you have a professional responsibility to report whatever it was that your research produced. Do try to be as accurate as possible for the sake of those trying to understand your research method and results. Quantify as much as possible to lend precision. You might want to review the kinds of methods employed by colleagues who have attempted to answer research questions resembling your own. If their methods do nor seem appropriate do not let the range of their methods limit your choice of research design. Your own design might produce unique data or observations worth sharing with your colleagues. On the other hand, by employing similar research designs capable of collecting compatible data, your research might be more easily included in a systematic review or meta-analysis. At the time of submitting a proposal for a poster or a presented paper you most likely will not have your results ready yet or the results might still be unanalyzed. This should be perfectly acceptable, but you should consider what results your hypothesis, null hypothesis, and alternative hypotheses suggest. Colleagues reviewing your proposal should be able to evaluate your proposal on the basis of your Objective, Methods, and anticipated Results alone, so do not worry about having actual results to report at the proposal submission stage. The CONCLUSION should not introduce any information or ideas not already described elsewhere in your structured abstracts. Ideally, it should be only one or two sentences in length, and can include an evaluation of your research and areas for further research -- questions for your colleagues to use as they start research with their own structured abstracts! Examples of Structured Abstracts The following articles include structured abstracts to give you some examples for different types of research: SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS , Brettle A. Information skills training: a systematic review of the literature. Health Information and Libraries Journal. 2003 Jun; 20 (2): in press. , Winning A., Beverley C. Clinical librarianship: a systematic review. Hypothesis. 2001 Fall; 15(3): 3, 8-9. Available from: META-ANALYSIS , Sharpe D, Rossiter L. Siblings of children with a chronic illness: a meta-analysis. Journal of Pediatric Psychology. 2002 Dec; 27 (8): 699-710. RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (INTERVENTION) , Bradley DR et al. Real-time, evidence-based medicine instruction: a randomized controlled trial in a neonatal intensive care unit. Journal of the Medical Library Association. 2002 Apr;90(2):194-201. Available from: COHORT STUDY (PREDICTION) , brown ha, Alpi K, Cleary D, Dorsey MJ. Accessing the most recent information Part II. Hypothesis. 2002 Summer; 16 (2): 6. Available from: QUALITATIVE RESEARCH STUDIES (EXPLORATION) , Maliski SL, Heilemann MV, McCorkle R. From "death sentence" to "good cancer": couples' transformation of a prostate cancer diagnosis. Nursing Research. 2002 Nov-Dec;51(6):391-7. , Fuat A, Hungin AP, Murphy JJ. Barriers to accurate diagnosis and effective management of heart failure in primary care: qualitative study. BMJ. 2003 Jan 25;326(7382):196. , Gallagher TH, Waterman AD, Ebers AG, Fraser VJ, Levinson W. Patients' and physicians' attitudes regarding the disclosure of medical errors. JAMA. 2003 Feb 26;289(8):1001-7. PROGRAM EVALUATION , Tannery NH et. al. Use of Web-based library resources by medical students in community and ambulatory settings. Journal of the Medical Library Association. 2002 Jul;90(3):305-9. Available from: PROJECT DESCRIPTION , Gregg AL et al. Designing a curriculum on Internet health resources for deaf high school students. Journal of the Medical Library Association. 2002 Oct;90(4):431-6. Available from: NARRATIVE REVIEW , Eldredge J. Cohort studies in health sciences librarianship. Journal of the Medical Library Association. 2002 Oct;90(4):380-92. Available from: SUMMARY Here is a checklist based on this description of the steps in the research process and how the structured abstract can assist you in clarifying your thoughts and actions: 1. Formulate a research QUESTION, refining it as you proceed with your research. 2. Consider the METHODS you will use to answer the question, including the population and setting, the research design, any instruments you might develop or employ and if you will include an intervention or exposure. 3. Once you have carried out your research, analyze the data you have collected and summarize it in your RESULTS section. 4. Finally, prepare your CONCLUSION and inspire your colleagues.