research paper title page with abstract

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An abstract is a short summary of your (published or unpublished) research paper, usually about a paragraph (c. 6-7 sentences, 150-250 words) long.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

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.

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.

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:

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 APA Format

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

An APA abstract is a brief, comprehensive summary of the contents of an article, research paper, dissertation, or report.

It is written in accordance with the guidelines of the American Psychological Association (APA), which is a widely used format in social and behavioral sciences. 

An APA abstract summarizes, usually in one paragraph of between 150–250 words, the major aspects of a research paper or dissertation in a prescribed sequence that includes:

• The rationale: the overall purpose of the study, providing a clear context for the research undertaken.
• Information regarding the method and participants: including materials/instruments, design, procedure, and data analysis.
• Main findings or trends: effectively highlighting the key outcomes of the hypotheses.
• Interpretations and conclusion(s): solidify the implications of the research.
• Keywords related to the study: assist the paper’s discoverability in academic databases.

The abstract should stand alone, be “self-contained,” and make sense to the reader in isolation from the main article.

The purpose of the abstract is to give the reader a quick overview of the essential information before reading the entire article. The abstract is placed on its own page, directly after the title page and before the main body of the paper.

Although the abstract will appear as the very first part of your paper, it’s good practice to write your abstract after you’ve drafted your full paper, so that you know what you’re summarizing.

Note : This page reflects the latest version of the APA Publication Manual (i.e., APA 7), released in October 2019.

Structure of the Abstract

[NOTE: DO NOT separate the components of the abstract – it should be written as a single paragraph. This section is separated to illustrate the abstract’s structure.]

1) The Rationale

One or two sentences describing the overall purpose of the study and the research problem(s) you investigated. You are basically justifying why this study was conducted.

• What is the importance of the research?
• Why would a reader be interested in the larger work?
• For example, are you filling a gap in previous research or applying new methods to take a fresh look at existing ideas or data?
• Women who are diagnosed with breast cancer can experience an array of psychosocial difficulties; however, social support, particularly from a spouse, has been shown to have a protective function during this time. This study examined the ways in which a woman’s daily mood, pain, and fatigue, and her spouse’s marital satisfaction predict the woman’s report of partner support in the context of breast cancer.
• The current nursing shortage, high hospital nurse job dissatisfaction, and reports of uneven quality of hospital care are not uniquely American phenomena.
• Students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) are more likely to exhibit behavioral difficulties than their typically developing peers. The aim of this study was to identify specific risk factors that influence variability in behavior difficulties among individuals with SEND.

2) The Method

Information regarding the participants (number, and population). One or two sentences outlining the method, explaining what was done and how. The method is described in the present tense.

• Pretest data from a larger intervention study and multilevel modeling were used to examine the effects of women’s daily mood, pain, and fatigue and average levels of mood, pain, and fatigue on women’s report of social support received from her partner, as well as how the effects of mood interacted with partners’ marital satisfaction.
• This paper presents reports from 43,000 nurses from more than 700 hospitals in the United States, Canada, England, Scotland, and Germany in 1998–1999.
• The study sample comprised 4,228 students with SEND, aged 5–15, drawn from 305 primary and secondary schools across England. Explanatory variables were measured at the individual and school levels at baseline, along with a teacher-reported measure of behavior difficulties (assessed at baseline and the 18-month follow-up).

3) The Results

One or two sentences indicating the main findings or trends found as a result of your analysis. The results are described in the present or past tense.

• Results show that on days in which women reported higher levels of negative or positive mood, as well as on days they reported more pain and fatigue, they reported receiving more support. Women who, on average, reported higher levels of positive mood tended to report receiving more support than those who, on average, reported lower positive mood. However, average levels of negative mood were not associated with support. Higher average levels of fatigue but not pain were associated with higher support. Finally, women whose husbands reported higher levels of marital satisfaction reported receiving more partner support, but husbands’ marital satisfaction did not moderate the effect of women’s mood on support.
• Nurses in countries with distinctly different healthcare systems report similar shortcomings in their work environments and the quality of hospital care. While the competence of and relation between nurses and physicians appear satisfactory, core problems in work design and workforce management threaten the provision of care.
• Hierarchical linear modeling of data revealed that differences between schools accounted for between 13% (secondary) and 15.4% (primary) of the total variance in the development of students’ behavior difficulties, with the remainder attributable to individual differences. Statistically significant risk markers for these problems across both phases of education were being male, eligibility for free school meals, being identified as a bully, and lower academic achievement. Additional risk markers specific to each phase of education at the individual and school levels are also acknowledged.

4) The Conclusion / Implications

A brief summary of your conclusions and implications of the results, described in the present tense. Explain the results and why the study is important to the reader.

• For example, what changes should be implemented as a result of the findings of the work?
• How does this work add to the body of knowledge on the topic?

Implications of these findings are discussed relative to assisting couples during this difficult time in their lives.

• Resolving these issues, which are amenable to managerial intervention, is essential to preserving patient safety and care of consistently high quality.
• Behavior difficulties are affected by risks across multiple ecological levels. Addressing any one of these potential influences is therefore likely to contribute to the reduction in the problems displayed.

The above examples of abstracts are from the following papers:

Aiken, L. H., Clarke, S. P., Sloane, D. M., Sochalski, J. A., Busse, R., Clarke, H., … & Shamian, J. (2001). Nurses’ reports on hospital care in five countries . Health affairs, 20(3) , 43-53.

Boeding, S. E., Pukay-Martin, N. D., Baucom, D. H., Porter, L. S., Kirby, J. S., Gremore, T. M., & Keefe, F. J. (2014). Couples and breast cancer: Women’s mood and partners’ marital satisfaction predicting support perception . Journal of Family Psychology, 28(5) , 675.

Oldfield, J., Humphrey, N., & Hebron, J. (2017). Risk factors in the development of behavior difficulties among students with special educational needs and disabilities: A multilevel analysis . British journal of educational psychology, 87(2) , 146-169.

5) Keywords

APA style suggests including a list of keywords at the end of the abstract. This is particularly common in academic articles and helps other researchers find your work in databases.

Keywords in an abstract should be selected to help other researchers find your work when searching an online database. These keywords should effectively represent the main topics of your study. Here are some tips for choosing keywords:

Core Concepts: Identify the most important ideas or concepts in your paper. These often include your main research topic, the methods you’ve used, or the theories you’re discussing.

Specificity: Your keywords should be specific to your research. For example, suppose your paper is about the effects of climate change on bird migration patterns in a specific region. In that case, your keywords might include “climate change,” “bird migration,” and the region’s name.

Consistency with Paper: Make sure your keywords are consistent with the terms you’ve used in your paper. For example, if you use the term “adolescent” rather than “teen” in your paper, choose “adolescent” as your keyword, not “teen.”

Jargon and Acronyms: Avoid using too much-specialized jargon or acronyms in your keywords, as these might not be understood or used by all researchers in your field.

Synonyms: Consider including synonyms of your keywords to capture as many relevant searches as possible. For example, if your paper discusses “post-traumatic stress disorder,” you might include “PTSD” as a keyword.

Remember, keywords are a tool for others to find your work, so think about what terms other researchers might use when searching for papers on your topic.

The Abstract SHOULD NOT contain:

Lengthy background or contextual information: The abstract should focus on your research and findings, not general topic background.

Undefined jargon, abbreviations,  or acronyms: The abstract should be accessible to a wide audience, so avoid highly specialized terms without defining them.

Citations: Abstracts typically do not include citations, as they summarize original research.

Incomplete sentences or bulleted lists: The abstract should be a single, coherent paragraph written in complete sentences.

New information not covered in the paper: The abstract should only summarize the paper’s content.

Subjective comments or value judgments: Stick to objective descriptions of your research.

Excessive details on methods or procedures: Keep descriptions of methods brief and focused on main steps.

Speculative or inconclusive statements: The abstract should state the research’s clear findings, not hypotheses or possible interpretations.

• Any illustration, figure, table, or references to them . All visual aids, data, or extensive details should be included in the main body of your paper, not in the abstract. 
• Elliptical or incomplete sentences should be avoided in an abstract . The use of ellipses (…), which could indicate incomplete thoughts or omitted text, is not appropriate in an abstract.

APA Style for Abstracts

An APA abstract must be formatted as follows:

Include the running head aligned to the left at the top of the page (professional papers only) and page number. Note, student papers do not require a running head. On the first line, center the heading “Abstract” and bold (do not underlined or italicize). Do not indent the single abstract paragraph (which begins one line below the section title). Double-space the text. Use Times New Roman font in 12 pt. Set one-inch (or 2.54 cm) margins. If you include a “keywords” section at the end of the abstract, indent the first line and italicize the word “Keywords” while leaving the keywords themselves without any formatting.

Example APA Abstract Page

Download this example as a PDF

Further Information

• APA 7th Edition Abstract and Keywords Guide
• Example APA Abstract
• How to Write a Good Abstract for a Scientific Paper or Conference Presentation
• How to Write a Lab Report
• Writing an APA paper

How long should an APA abstract be?

An APA abstract should typically be between 150 to 250 words long. However, the exact length may vary depending on specific publication or assignment guidelines. It is crucial that it succinctly summarizes the essential elements of the work, including purpose, methods, findings, and conclusions.

Where does the abstract go in an APA paper?

In an APA formatted paper, the abstract is placed on its own page, directly after the title page and before the main body of the paper. It’s typically the second page of the document. It starts with the word “Abstract” (centered and not in bold) at the top of the page, followed by the text of the abstract itself.

What are the 4 C’s of abstract writing?

The 4 C’s of abstract writing are an approach to help you create a well-structured and informative abstract. They are:

Conciseness: An abstract should briefly summarize the key points of your study. Stick to the word limit (typically between 150-250 words for an APA abstract) and avoid unnecessary details.

Clarity: Your abstract should be easy to understand. Avoid jargon and complex sentences. Clearly explain the purpose, methods, results, and conclusions of your study.

Completeness: Even though it’s brief, the abstract should provide a complete overview of your study, including the purpose, methods, key findings, and your interpretation of the results.

Cohesion: The abstract should flow logically from one point to the next, maintaining a coherent narrative about your study. It’s not just a list of disjointed elements; it’s a brief story of your research from start to finish.

What is the abstract of a psychology paper?

An abstract in a psychology paper serves as a snapshot of the paper, allowing readers to quickly understand the purpose, methodology, results, and implications of the research without reading the entire paper. It is generally between 150-250 words long.

Title, Abstract, and Reference Page Format (APA): Home

About this page.

This page contains information on Title, Abstract, and Reference page format according to APA 7th edition using the Concise Guide to APA Style: The Official APA Style for Students .

• Title Page Set-up
• Student Title Page Guide
• Student Paper Template
• Sample Abstract
• Abstract Guide

Other Title Page Information

Title: Summarizes the main idea of your paper (the shorter the better) and is in title case (see Style and Format page).

Author: Include the first name, middle initial, and last name. If there are two authors separate the names by the word "and." If there are three or more authors separate the names with a comma and include the word "and" before the final name.

Page number: Yes, your title page has a page number. It will always be page 1.

Running head: Is not required for student papers, but check with your instructor to see if they prefer one.

Other APA Pages

• Style and Format
• In-text citations
• Title and Reference Page Format
• I Want to See A Sample Paper

(See sections 1.6 - 1.9 of the Concise Guide to APA Style )

A brief and comprehensive summary of the contents of your paper. Abstracts are typically NOT required for student papers, UNLESS the instructor request that you include one (so check before you turn in your final paper). Abstracts are short, typically no longer than 250 words.

Abstracts appear on their own page after the title page with the label "Abstract" centered and in bold at the top. The abstract will always be page 2 of your paper.

Abstracts are written as a SINGLE paragraph. DO NOT indent the paragraph.

. A good abstract is

Accurate: Make sure that the abstract correctly reflects the purpose and content of the paper. Do NOT include information that does not appear in the text

Nonevaluative: Report rather than evaluate. Do NOT add to or comment on what is in the text

Coherent and readable: Write in clear and deliberate language. Use active rather than passive voice (e.g., "investigated" rather than "an investigation of"). Use present tense to describe conclusions or results. Use past tense to describe specific variables manipulated outcomes measured.

Concise: Be short, concise, and BRIEF. Begin the abstract with the most important points (include the most important four or five). Do NOT repeat the title of your paper in the abstract.

(See sections 1.10 of the Concise Guide to APA Style )

Reference Page

(See section 1.12  and sections 9.42 - 9.49 of the  Concise Guide to APA Style )

• Last Updated: Aug 14, 2023 10:58 AM
• URL: https://mohave.libguides.com/tr

Home / Guides / Citation Guides / APA Format / How to write an APA abstract

How to write an APA abstract

An APA abstract is a short summary designed to help a reader decide if they are going to read the entire paper. An effective abstract will communicate your hypothesis, method, and results while also creating credibility for yourself as the author. An abstract will also make it easier for new readers to find your work.

In this guide, you will learn how to format an APA abstract. It begins with an overview of the key aspects included with an abstract and ends with a set of real APA abstract examples that you can look at.

The information in this guide comes straight from the source: The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 7 th edition. Most of the relevant information comes from Section 2.9.

Here’s a run-through of everything this page includes:

What is an APA abstract page?

How to format an apa abstract, paragraph format vs. structured format, adding a keywords section after your apa abstract, about apa formatting and the apa style guide.

While the abstract page plays an important role in getting the reader interested, it is not a sales pitch. It’s about reporting, not commenting. That means that it should accurately reflect each key aspect of your paper.  In other words, it is a concise, comprehensive summary of your paper.

This is where you describe the problem you were exploring, the methods you used to explore it, and the results or conclusions of your exploration. In some cases, you might also be required to state the significance of your conclusions.

Here are some of the key aspects of an APA abstract that might be requested by the publication:

• Basic problem : Why did this work need to be done?
• Clearly-stated hypotheses: What was your hypothesis?
• Methods of investigation: How did you do your research? How did you design your experiment or argument? For scientific papers, include basic sample information.
• Results: What was the result of your study?
• Implications: What is the significance of your findings?

Remember, the specific sections or labels in your abstract might vary based on who you are submitting to.

Qualities of a good abstract

In addition to the formatting requirements, the Publication Manual also provides some guidance on what other qualities make for a good abstract.

Here are the qualities of a good abstract as defined by APA. You can find more information on how to formulate a great abstract in chapter 3.

• Accurate: The most important thing is that your abstract accurately reflects the contents and purpose of your paper. The general rule of thumb for accuracy is, if it doesn’t appear in your paper, it should not appear in the abstract.
• Non-evaluative: The APA instructs us to “Report rather than evaluate” (p.73). It is inappropriate to add any opinions or comments to the abstract.
• Coherent and readable: Your abstract needs to be as clear as possible. Use concise, deliberate language. It helps to use verbs instead of nouns when possible (e.g., “investigated” rather than “an investigation of”).
• Concise: Make sure every sentence is as informative as possible. There should be no “extra” words in an abstract; it’s all about getting the point across as efficiently as possible. Because abstracts are often used for academic search engines, it is good practice to use specific terms that you think people would use to find your paper.

In large part, the abstract page is formatted just like any APA paper. That means that it should be 12pt font and double-spaced the whole way through.

A properly formatted abstract will also be:

• No more than 250 words in length.
• Placed on its own page, immediately following the APA title page .
• Labeled with a bold, center-justified “Abstract” at the top

It is important to note that some publications will have their own instructions on how to format the abstract. In addition, some publications require a statement of significance in addition to the abstract.

If you are submitting your paper to a journal, be sure to check the publication’s author instructions.

The abstract page of an APA paper can be presented in two ways. As the author, you have the option of presenting your abstract in either paragraph format or structured format .

Paragraph format is more common with student papers. This is a single paragraph with no indentation on the first line. The objective, method, results, and conclusions are presented one after another in a simple, narrative manner.

Structured format is similar in formatting with one key difference. This format calls for the insertion of specific labels to identify the different parts of the abstract. In other words, “Objective,” “Method,” “Results,” and “Conclusions” are presented as labels before their corresponding sentences in the abstract.

It’s important to remember that some publications have different labeling requirements. If you’re submitting your paper to a journal, be sure to check the formatting standards.

APA abstract example: Paragraph format

Let’s move on to a specific example of a properly formatted APA abstract written in paragraph format.

The following abstract is from the paper “Movement, wildness, and animal aesthetics” by Tom Greaves. Note how the first line is not indented like a normal paragraph.

The key role that animals play in our aesthetic appreciation of the natural world has only gradually been highlighted in discussions in environmental aesthetics. In this article I make use of the phenomenological notion of ‘perceptual sense’ as developed by Merleau-Ponty to argue that open-ended expressive-responsive movement is the primary aesthetic ground for our appreciation of animals. It is through their movement that the array of qualities we admire in animals are manifest qua animal qualities. Against functionalist and formalist accounts, I defend and develop an account of expressive-responsive movement as the primary perceptual sense of animals. I go on to suggest that the primacy of movement in the aesthetic appreciation of animals is also the primary sense of animal ‘wildness’, and that a key part of the rewilding paradigm should be the development of such appreciation.

In the paragraph above, Greaves uses his first sentence to explain the basic problem, and the next two sentences to describe the method. The fourth sentence presents the results, and the fifth sentence wraps things up with a conclusion.

It’s only five sentences, and it tells the reader everything they need to know about the contents of the paper.

APA abstract example: Structured format

Next up is an example of a properly formatted APA abstract written in structured format. This example uses the same abstract as above, with the addition of identifying labels.

Structured abstracts are only necessary when specifically requested by the class, institution, or journal you are submitting to. For all APA journals, these labels are bold, italicized, and capitalized.

Objective. The key role that animals play in our aesthetic appreciation of the natural world has only gradually been highlighted in discussions in environmental aesthetics. Method. In this article I make use of the phenomenological notion of ‘perceptual sense’ as developed by Merleau-Ponty to argue that open-ended expressive-responsive movement is the primary aesthetic ground for our appreciation of animals. It is through their movement that the array of qualities we admire in animals are manifest qua animal qualities. Results. Against functionalist and formalist accounts, I defend and develop an account of expressive-responsive movement as the primary perceptual sense of animals. Conclusions. I go on to suggest that the primacy of movement in the aesthetic appreciation of animals is also the primary sense of animal ‘wildness’, and that a key part of the rewilding paradigm should be the development of such appreciation.

A paper’s keywords section is intended to help people find your work. These are the acronyms, phrases, or words that describe the most important elements of your paper. Any papers submitted to an APA journal should include three to five keywords.

The keywords section is generally only required for professional papers. However, some professors and universities specifically request that it be included in student papers.

Formatting the keywords section

The keywords are presented on the same page as the abstract, one line below the end of the abstract paragraph. It begins with the label “Keywords:”, and it is italicized and indented 0.5in from the margin.

Next comes a list of the keywords separated by commas. The keywords should be lowercase, unless the keyword is a proper noun. There is no punctuation at the end of a keyword list.

APA abstract with keywords example

Take another look at the abstract example that was provided above. Here is what a set of keywords might look like for that paper, pulling between 3-5 specific terms from the abstract itself.

The keywords are placed one line below the abstract without any additional spaces.

Keywords: animals, animal aesthetics, wildness, rewilding

The information in this guide came from the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7 th ed.). Chapter 2 of this book lays out the basic formatting elements for APA 7, including how to write an APA abstract.

You can also consult chapter 3.3 for more in-depth recommendations on how to formulate your abstract based on what type of paper you are writing.

Published October 27, 2020.

APA Formatting Guide

APA Formatting

• Annotated Bibliography
• Block Quotes
• et al Usage
• In-text Citations
• Multiple Authors
• Paraphrasing
• Page Numbers
• Parenthetical Citations
• Reference Page
• Sample Paper
• APA 7 Updates
• View APA Guide

Citation Examples

• Book Chapter
• Journal Article
• Magazine Article
• Newspaper Article
• Website (no author)
• View all APA Examples

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

We are sorry that this post was not useful for you!

Let us improve this post!

Tell us how we can improve this post?

APA Citation Examples

Writing Tools

Citation Generators

Other Citation Styles

Plagiarism Checker

Upload a paper to check for plagiarism against billions of sources and get advanced writing suggestions for clarity and style.

Get Started

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Saudi J Anaesth
• v.13(Suppl 1); 2019 Apr

Writing the title and abstract for a research paper: Being concise, precise, and meticulous is the key

Milind s. tullu.

Department of Pediatrics, Seth G.S. Medical College and KEM Hospital, Parel, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

This article deals with formulating a suitable title and an appropriate abstract for an original research paper. The “title” and the “abstract” are the “initial impressions” of a research article, and hence they need to be drafted correctly, accurately, carefully, and meticulously. Often both of these are drafted after the full manuscript is ready. Most readers read only the title and the abstract of a research paper and very few will go on to read the full paper. The title and the abstract are the most important parts of a research paper and should be pleasant to read. The “title” should be descriptive, direct, accurate, appropriate, interesting, concise, precise, unique, and should not be misleading. 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. It is very important to include the most important words and terms (the “keywords”) in the title and the abstract for appropriate indexing purpose and for retrieval from the search engines and scientific databases. Such keywords should be listed after the abstract. One must adhere to the instructions laid down by the target journal with regard to the style and number of words permitted for the title and the abstract.

Introduction

This article deals with drafting a suitable “title” and an appropriate “abstract” for an original research paper. Because the “title” and the “abstract” are the “initial impressions” or the “face” of a research article, they need to be drafted correctly, accurately, carefully, meticulously, and consume time and energy.[ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ] Often, these are drafted after the complete manuscript draft is ready.[ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 9 , 10 , 11 ] Most readers will read only the title and the abstract of a published research paper, and very few “interested ones” (especially, if the paper is of use to them) will go on to read the full paper.[ 1 , 2 ] One must remember to adhere to the instructions laid down by the “target journal” (the journal for which the author is writing) regarding the style and number of words permitted for the title and the abstract.[ 2 , 4 , 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 12 ] Both the title and the abstract are the most important parts of a research paper – for editors (to decide whether to process the paper for further review), for reviewers (to get an initial impression of the paper), and for the readers (as these may be the only parts of the paper available freely and hence, read widely).[ 4 , 8 , 12 ] It may be worth for the novice author to browse through titles and abstracts of several prominent journals (and their target journal as well) to learn more about the wording and styles of the titles and abstracts, as well as the aims and scope of the particular journal.[ 5 , 7 , 9 , 13 ]

The details of the title are discussed under the subheadings of importance, types, drafting, and checklist.

Importance of the title

When a reader browses through the table of contents of a journal issue (hard copy or on website), the title is the “ first detail” or “face” of the paper that is read.[ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 13 ] Hence, it needs to be simple, direct, accurate, appropriate, specific, functional, interesting, attractive/appealing, concise/brief, precise/focused, unambiguous, memorable, captivating, informative (enough to encourage the reader to read further), unique, catchy, and it should not be misleading.[ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 12 ] It should have “just enough details” to arouse the interest and curiosity of the reader so that the reader then goes ahead with studying the abstract and then (if still interested) the full paper.[ 1 , 2 , 4 , 13 ] Journal websites, electronic databases, and search engines use the words in the title and abstract (the “keywords”) to retrieve a particular paper during a search; hence, the importance of these words in accessing the paper by the readers has been emphasized.[ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 12 , 14 ] Such important words (or keywords) should be arranged in appropriate order of importance as per the context of the paper and should be placed at the beginning of the title (rather than the later part of the title, as some search engines like Google may just display only the first six to seven words of the title).[ 3 , 5 , 12 ] Whimsical, amusing, or clever titles, though initially appealing, may be missed or misread by the busy reader and very short titles may miss the essential scientific words (the “keywords”) used by the indexing agencies to catch and categorize the paper.[ 1 , 3 , 4 , 9 ] Also, amusing or hilarious titles may be taken less seriously by the readers and may be cited less often.[ 4 , 15 ] An excessively long or complicated title may put off the readers.[ 3 , 9 ] It may be a good idea to draft the title after the main body of the text and the abstract are drafted.[ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]

Types of titles

Titles can be descriptive, declarative, or interrogative. They can also be classified as nominal, compound, or full-sentence titles.

Descriptive or neutral title

This has the essential elements of the research theme, that is, the patients/subjects, design, interventions, comparisons/control, and outcome, but does not reveal the main result or the conclusion.[ 3 , 4 , 12 , 16 ] Such a title allows the reader to interpret the findings of the research paper in an impartial manner and with an open mind.[ 3 ] These titles also give complete information about the contents of the article, have several keywords (thus increasing the visibility of the article in search engines), and have increased chances of being read and (then) being cited as well.[ 4 ] Hence, such descriptive titles giving a glimpse of the paper are generally preferred.[ 4 , 16 ]

Declarative title

This title states the main finding of the study in the title itself; it reduces the curiosity of the reader, may point toward a bias on the part of the author, and hence is best avoided.[ 3 , 4 , 12 , 16 ]

Interrogative title

This is the one which has a query or the research question in the title.[ 3 , 4 , 16 ] Though a query in the title has the ability to sensationalize the topic, and has more downloads (but less citations), it can be distracting to the reader and is again best avoided for a research article (but can, at times, be used for a review article).[ 3 , 6 , 16 , 17 ]

From a sentence construct point of view, titles may be nominal (capturing only the main theme of the study), compound (with subtitles to provide additional relevant information such as context, design, location/country, temporal aspect, sample size, importance, and a provocative or a literary; for example, see the title of this review), or full-sentence titles (which are longer and indicate an added degree of certainty of the results).[ 4 , 6 , 9 , 16 ] Any of these constructs may be used depending on the type of article, the key message, and the author's preference or judgement.[ 4 ]

Drafting a suitable title

A stepwise process can be followed to draft the appropriate title. The author should describe the paper in about three sentences, avoiding the results and ensuring that these sentences contain important scientific words/keywords that describe the main contents and subject of the paper.[ 1 , 4 , 6 , 12 ] Then the author should join the sentences to form a single sentence, shorten the length (by removing redundant words or adjectives or phrases), and finally edit the title (thus drafted) to make it more accurate, concise (about 10–15 words), and precise.[ 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 9 ] Some journals require that the study design be included in the title, and this may be placed (using a colon) after the primary title.[ 2 , 3 , 4 , 14 ] The title should try to incorporate the Patients, Interventions, Comparisons and Outcome (PICO).[ 3 ] The place of the study may be included in the title (if absolutely necessary), that is, if the patient characteristics (such as study population, socioeconomic conditions, or cultural practices) are expected to vary as per the country (or the place of the study) and have a bearing on the possible outcomes.[ 3 , 6 ] Lengthy titles can be boring and appear unfocused, whereas very short titles may not be representative of the contents of the article; hence, optimum length is required to ensure that the title explains the main theme and content of the manuscript.[ 4 , 5 , 9 ] Abbreviations (except the standard or commonly interpreted ones such as HIV, AIDS, DNA, RNA, CDC, FDA, ECG, and EEG) or acronyms should be avoided in the title, as a reader not familiar with them may skip such an article and nonstandard abbreviations may create problems in indexing the article.[ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 9 , 12 ] Also, too much of technical jargon or chemical formulas in the title may confuse the readers and the article may be skipped by them.[ 4 , 9 ] Numerical values of various parameters (stating study period or sample size) should also be avoided in the titles (unless deemed extremely essential).[ 4 ] It may be worthwhile to take an opinion from a impartial colleague before finalizing the title.[ 4 , 5 , 6 ] Thus, multiple factors (which are, at times, a bit conflicting or contrasting) need to be considered while formulating a title, and hence this should not be done in a hurry.[ 4 , 6 ] Many journals ask the authors to draft a “short title” or “running head” or “running title” for printing in the header or footer of the printed paper.[ 3 , 12 ] This is an abridged version of the main title of up to 40–50 characters, may have standard abbreviations, and helps the reader to navigate through the paper.[ 3 , 12 , 14 ]

Checklist for a good title

Table 1 gives a checklist/useful tips for drafting a good title for a research paper.[ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 12 ] Table 2 presents some of the titles used by the author of this article in his earlier research papers, and the appropriateness of the titles has been commented upon. As an individual exercise, the reader may try to improvise upon the titles (further) after reading the corresponding abstract and full paper.

Checklist/useful tips for drafting a good title for a research paper

Some titles used by author of this article in his earlier publications and remark/comment on their appropriateness

The Abstract

The details of the abstract are discussed under the subheadings of importance, types, drafting, and checklist.

Importance of the abstract

The abstract is a summary or synopsis of the full research paper and also needs to have similar characteristics like the title. It needs to be simple, direct, specific, functional, clear, unbiased, honest, concise, precise, self-sufficient, complete, comprehensive, scholarly, balanced, and should not be misleading.[ 1 , 2 , 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 13 , 17 ] Writing an abstract is to extract and summarize (AB – absolutely, STR – straightforward, ACT – actual data presentation and interpretation).[ 17 ] The title and abstracts are the only sections of the research paper that are often freely available to the readers on the journal websites, search engines, and in many abstracting agencies/databases, whereas the full paper may attract a payment per view or a fee for downloading the pdf copy.[ 1 , 2 , 3 , 7 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 13 , 14 ] The abstract is an independent and stand-alone (that is, well understood without reading the full paper) section of the manuscript and is used by the editor to decide the fate of the article and to choose appropriate reviewers.[ 2 , 7 , 10 , 12 , 13 ] Even the reviewers are initially supplied only with the title and the abstract before they agree to review the full manuscript.[ 7 , 13 ] This is the second most commonly read part of the manuscript, and therefore it should reflect the contents of the main text of the paper accurately and thus act as a “real trailer” of the full article.[ 2 , 7 , 11 ] The readers will go through the full paper only if they find the abstract interesting and relevant to their practice; else they may skip the paper if the abstract is unimpressive.[ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 13 ] The abstract needs to highlight the selling point of the manuscript and succeed in luring the reader to read the complete paper.[ 3 , 7 ] The title and the abstract should be constructed using keywords (key terms/important words) from all the sections of the main text.[ 12 ] Abstracts are also used for submitting research papers to a conference for consideration for presentation (as oral paper or poster).[ 9 , 13 , 17 ] Grammatical and typographic errors reflect poorly on the quality of the abstract, may indicate carelessness/casual attitude on part of the author, and hence should be avoided at all times.[ 9 ]

Types of abstracts

The abstracts can be structured or unstructured. They can also be classified as descriptive or informative abstracts.

Structured and unstructured abstracts

Structured abstracts are followed by most journals, are more informative, and include specific subheadings/subsections under which the abstract needs to be composed.[ 1 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 13 , 17 , 18 ] These subheadings usually include context/background, objectives, design, setting, participants, interventions, main outcome measures, results, and conclusions.[ 1 ] Some journals stick to the standard IMRAD format for the structure of the abstracts, and the subheadings would include Introduction/Background, Methods, Results, And (instead of Discussion) the Conclusion/s.[ 1 , 2 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 17 , 18 ] Structured abstracts are more elaborate, informative, easy to read, recall, and peer-review, and hence are preferred; however, they consume more space and can have same limitations as an unstructured abstract.[ 7 , 9 , 18 ] The structured abstracts are (possibly) better understood by the reviewers and readers. Anyway, the choice of the type of the abstract and the subheadings of a structured abstract depend on the particular journal style and is not left to the author's wish.[ 7 , 10 , 12 ] Separate subheadings may be necessary for reporting meta-analysis, educational research, quality improvement work, review, or case study.[ 1 ] Clinical trial abstracts need to include the essential items mentioned in the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials) guidelines.[ 7 , 9 , 14 , 19 ] Similar guidelines exist for various other types of studies, including observational studies and for studies of diagnostic accuracy.[ 20 , 21 ] A useful resource for the above guidelines is available at www.equator-network.org (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research). Unstructured (or non-structured) abstracts are free-flowing, do not have predefined subheadings, and are commonly used for papers that (usually) do not describe original research.[ 1 , 7 , 9 , 10 ]

The four-point structured abstract: This has the following elements which need to be properly balanced with regard to the content/matter under each subheading:[ 9 ]

Background and/or Objectives: This states why the work was undertaken and is usually written in just a couple of sentences.[ 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 ] The hypothesis/study question and the major objectives are also stated under this subheading.[ 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 ]

Methods: This subsection is the longest, states what was done, and gives essential details of the study design, setting, participants, blinding, sample size, sampling method, intervention/s, duration and follow-up, research instruments, main outcome measures, parameters evaluated, and how the outcomes were assessed or analyzed.[ 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 17 ]

Results/Observations/Findings: This subheading states what was found, is longer, is difficult to draft, and needs to mention important details including the number of study participants, results of analysis (of primary and secondary objectives), and include actual data (numbers, mean, median, standard deviation, “P” values, 95% confidence intervals, effect sizes, relative risks, odds ratio, etc.).[ 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 17 ]

Conclusions: The take-home message (the “so what” of the paper) and other significant/important findings should be stated here, considering the interpretation of the research question/hypothesis and results put together (without overinterpreting the findings) and may also include the author's views on the implications of the study.[ 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 17 ]

The eight-point structured abstract: This has the following eight subheadings – Objectives, Study Design, Study Setting, Participants/Patients, Methods/Intervention, Outcome Measures, Results, and Conclusions.[ 3 , 9 , 18 ] The instructions to authors given by the particular journal state whether they use the four- or eight-point abstract or variants thereof.[ 3 , 14 ]

Descriptive and Informative abstracts

Descriptive abstracts are short (75–150 words), only portray what the paper contains without providing any more details; the reader has to read the full paper to know about its contents and are rarely used for original research papers.[ 7 , 10 ] These are used for case reports, reviews, opinions, and so on.[ 7 , 10 ] Informative abstracts (which may be structured or unstructured as described above) give a complete detailed summary of the article contents and truly reflect the actual research done.[ 7 , 10 ]

Drafting a suitable abstract

It is important to religiously stick to the instructions to authors (format, word limit, font size/style, and subheadings) provided by the journal for which the abstract and the paper are being written.[ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 13 ] Most journals allow 200–300 words for formulating the abstract and it is wise to restrict oneself to this word limit.[ 1 , 2 , 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 22 ] Though some authors prefer to draft the abstract initially, followed by the main text of the paper, it is recommended to draft the abstract in the end to maintain accuracy and conformity with the main text of the paper (thus maintaining an easy linkage/alignment with title, on one hand, and the introduction section of the main text, on the other hand).[ 2 , 7 , 9 , 10 , 11 ] The authors should check the subheadings (of the structured abstract) permitted by the target journal, use phrases rather than sentences to draft the content of the abstract, and avoid passive voice.[ 1 , 7 , 9 , 12 ] Next, the authors need to get rid of redundant words and edit the abstract (extensively) to the correct word count permitted (every word in the abstract “counts”!).[ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 13 ] It is important to ensure that the key message, focus, and novelty of the paper are not compromised; the rationale of the study and the basis of the conclusions are clear; and that the abstract is consistent with the main text of the paper.[ 1 , 2 , 3 , 7 , 9 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 17 , 22 ] This is especially important while submitting a revision of the paper (modified after addressing the reviewer's comments), as the changes made in the main (revised) text of the paper need to be reflected in the (revised) abstract as well.[ 2 , 10 , 12 , 14 , 22 ] Abbreviations should be avoided in an abstract, unless they are conventionally accepted or standard; references, tables, or figures should not be cited in the abstract.[ 7 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 13 ] It may be worthwhile not to rush with the abstract and to get an opinion by an impartial colleague on the content of the abstract; and if possible, the full paper (an “informal” peer-review).[ 1 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 11 , 17 ] Appropriate “Keywords” (three to ten words or phrases) should follow the abstract and should be preferably chosen from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) list of the U.S. National Library of Medicine ( https://meshb.nlm.nih.gov/search ) and are used for indexing purposes.[ 2 , 3 , 11 , 12 ] These keywords need to be different from the words in the main title (the title words are automatically used for indexing the article) and can be variants of the terms/phrases used in the title, or words from the abstract and the main text.[ 3 , 12 ] The ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors; http://www.icmje.org/ ) also recommends publishing the clinical trial registration number at the end of the abstract.[ 7 , 14 ]

Checklist for a good abstract

Table 3 gives a checklist/useful tips for formulating a good abstract for a research paper.[ 1 , 2 , 3 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 17 , 22 ]

Checklist/useful tips for formulating a good abstract for a research paper

Concluding Remarks

This review article has given a detailed account of the importance and types of titles and abstracts. It has also attempted to give useful hints for drafting an appropriate title and a complete abstract for a research paper. It is hoped that this review will help the authors in their career in medical writing.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgement

The author thanks Dr. Hemant Deshmukh - Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College & KEM Hospital, for granting permission to publish this manuscript.

• SpringerLink shop

Title, Abstract and Keywords

The importance of titles.

The title of your manuscript is usually the first introduction readers (and reviewers) have to your work. Therefore, you must select a title that grabs attention, accurately describes the contents of your manuscript, and makes people want to read further.

An effective title should:

• Convey the  main topics  of the study
• Highlight the  importance  of the research
• Be  concise
• Attract  readers

Writing a good title for your manuscript can be challenging. First, list the topics covered by the manuscript. Try to put all of the topics together in the title using as few words as possible. A title that is too long will seem clumsy, annoy readers, and probably not meet journal requirements.

Does Vaccinating Children and Adolescents with Inactivated Influenza Virus Inhibit the Spread of Influenza in Unimmunized Residents of Rural Communities?

This title has too many unnecessary words.

Influenza Vaccination of Children: A Randomized Trial

This title doesn’t give enough information about what makes the manuscript interesting.

Effect of Child Influenza Vaccination on Infection Rates in Rural Communities: A Randomized Trial This is an effective title. It is short, easy to understand, and conveys the important aspects of the research.

Think about why your research will be of interest to other scientists. This should be related to the reason you decided to study the topic. If your title makes this clear, it will likely attract more readers to your manuscript. TIP: Write down a few possible titles, and then select the best to refine further. Ask your colleagues their opinion. Spending the time needed to do this will result in a better title.

Abstract and Keywords

The Abstract is:

• A  summary  of the content of the journal manuscript
• A time-saving  shortcut  for busy researchers
• A guide to the most important parts of your manuscript’s written content

Many readers will only read the Abstract of your manuscript. Therefore, it has to be able to  stand alone . In most cases the abstract is the only part of your article that appears in indexing databases such as Web of Science or PubMed and so will be the most accessed part of your article; making a good impression will encourage researchers to read your full paper.

A well written abstract can also help speed up the peer-review process. During peer review, referees are usually only sent the abstract when invited to review the paper. Therefore, the abstract needs to contain enough information about the paper to allow referees to make a judgement as to whether they have enough expertise to review the paper and be engaging enough for them to want to review it.

Your Abstract should answer these questions about your manuscript:

• What was done?
• Why did you do it?
• What did you find?
• Why are these findings useful and important?

Answering these questions lets readers know the most important points about your study, and helps them decide whether they want to read the rest of the paper. Make sure you follow the proper journal manuscript formatting guidelines when preparing your abstract.

TIP: Journals often set a maximum word count for Abstracts, often 250 words, and no citations. This is to ensure that the full Abstract appears in indexing services.

Keywords  are a tool to help indexers and search engines find relevant papers. If database search engines can find your journal manuscript, readers will be able to find it too. This will increase the number of people reading your manuscript, and likely lead to more citations.

However, to be effective, Keywords must be chosen carefully. They should:

• Represent  the content of your manuscript
• Be  specific  to your field or sub-field

Manuscript title:  Direct observation of nonlinear optics in an isolated carbon nanotube

Poor keywords:  molecule, optics, lasers, energy lifetime

Better keywords:  single-molecule interaction, Kerr effect, carbon nanotubes, energy level structure

Manuscript title:  Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration Poor keywords:  neuron, brain, OA (an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, signaling

Better keywords:  neurodegenerative diseases; CA1 region, hippocampal; okadaic acid; neurotoxins; MAP kinase signaling system; cell death

Manuscript title:  Increases in levels of sediment transport at former glacial-interglacial transitions

Poor keywords:  climate change, erosion, plant effects Better keywords:  quaternary climate change, soil erosion, bioturbation

Back │ Next

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

Scholars often write abstracts for various applications: conference presentations may require an abstract or other short summary for a program; journal articles almost always require abstracts; invited talks and lectures are often advertised using an abstract. While the application may necessarily change the length of the abstract (a conference program may only allow for 50-75 words, for instance), the purpose and structure remains fairly constant.

Abstracts are generally kept brief (approximately 150-200 words). They differ by field, but in general, they need to summarize the article so that readers can decide if it is relevant to their work. The typical abstract includes these elements:

• A statement of the problem and objectives
• A statement of the significance of the work
• A summary of employed methods or your research approach
• A summary of findings or conclusions of the study
• A description of the implications of the findings

Regardless of field, abstract authors should explain the purpose of the work, methods used, the results and the conclusions that can be drawn. However, each field purports slightly different ways to structure the abstract. A reliable strategy is to write the abstract as a condensed version of your article, with 1-2 sentences summarizing each major section. This means that in many of the sciences and a large portion of the humanities, abstracts follow a version of the IMRAD structure: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion.

Most scientific journals require authors to submit such abstracts. It is generally advisable to write the abstract in the English language. That is because most papers in other languages, especially Asian nations, tend to publish an English abstract with common search engines, such as, the MLA site.

Example Abstract

This example abstract follows the IMRAD structure closely. The first two sentences are the introduction and background information. Sentences 3-5 describe the methods used in the study. Sentence 6 summarizes the results, while the last two sentences summarize the discussion and conclusion of the study; they also indicate the significance of the results.

Usability and User-Centered Theory for 21 st Century OWLs — by Dana Lynn Driscoll, H. Allen Brizee, Michael Salvo, and Morgan Sousa from The Handbook of Research on Virtual Workplaces and the New Nature of Business Practices . Eds. Kirk St. Amant and Pavel Zemlansky. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing, 2008.

This article describes results of usability research conducted on the Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL). The Purdue OWL is an information-rich educational website that provides free writing resources to users worldwide. Researchers conducted two generations of usability tests. In the first test, participants were asked to navigate the OWL and answer questions. Results of the first test and user-centered scholarship indicated that a more user-centered focus would improve usability. The second test asked participants to answer writing-related questions using both the OWL website and a user-centered OWL prototype. Participants took significantly less time to find information using the prototype and reported a more positive response to the user-centered prototype than the original OWL. Researchers conclude that a user-centered website is more effective and can be a model for information-rich online resources. Researchers also conclude that usability research can be a productive source of ideas, underscoring the need for participatory invention.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• Thesis & Dissertation Title Page | Free Templates & Examples

Thesis & Dissertation Title Page | Free Templates & Examples

Published on May 19, 2022 by Tegan George . Revised on July 18, 2023.

The title page (or cover page) of your thesis , dissertation , or research paper should contain all the key information about your document. It usually includes:

• Dissertation or thesis title
• The type of document (e.g., dissertation, research paper)
• The department and institution
• The degree program (e.g., Master of Arts)
• The date of submission

It sometimes also includes your dissertation topic or field of study, your student number, your supervisor’s name, and your university’s logo.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Title page format, title page templates, title page example, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions.

Your department will usually tell you exactly what should be included on your title page and how it should be formatted. Be sure to check whether there are specific guidelines for margins, spacing, and font size.

Title pages for APA and MLA style

The format of your title page can also depend on the citation style you’re using. There may be guidelines in regards to alignment, page numbering, and mandatory elements.

• MLA guidelines for formatting the title page
• APA guidelines for formatting the title page

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

We’ve created a few templates to help you design the title page for your thesis, dissertation, or research paper. You can download them in the format of your choice by clicking on the corresponding button.

Research paper Google Doc

Dissertation Google Doc

Thesis Google Doc

A typical example of a thesis title page looks like this:

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

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

The title page of your thesis or dissertation should include your name, department, institution, degree program, and submission date.

Usually, no title page is needed in an MLA paper . A header is generally included at the top of the first page instead. The exceptions are when:

• Your instructor requires one, or
• Your paper is a group project

In those cases, you should use a title page instead of a header, listing the same information but on a separate page.

The title page of your thesis or dissertation goes first, before all other content or lists that you may choose to include.

In most styles, the title page is used purely to provide information and doesn’t include any images. Ask your supervisor if you are allowed to include an image on the title page before doing so. If you do decide to include one, make sure to check whether you need permission from the creator of the image.

Include a note directly beneath the image acknowledging where it comes from, beginning with the word “ Note .” (italicized and followed by a period). Include a citation and copyright attribution . Don’t title, number, or label the image as a figure , since it doesn’t appear in your main text.

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.

George, T. (2023, July 18). Thesis & Dissertation Title Page | Free Templates & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 12, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/title-page/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, thesis & dissertation acknowledgements | tips & examples, dissertation table of contents in word | instructions & examples, figure and table lists | word instructions, template & examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

How to Write a Research Proposal: (with Examples & Templates)

Table of Contents

Before conducting a study, a research proposal should be created that outlines researchers’ plans and methodology and is submitted to the concerned evaluating organization or person. Creating a research proposal is an important step to ensure that researchers are on track and are moving forward as intended. A research proposal can be defined as a detailed plan or blueprint for the proposed research that you intend to undertake. It provides readers with a snapshot of your project by describing what you will investigate, why it is needed, and how you will conduct the research.  

Your research proposal should aim to explain to the readers why your research is relevant and original, that you understand the context and current scenario in the field, have the appropriate resources to conduct the research, and that the research is feasible given the usual constraints.  

This article will describe in detail the purpose and typical structure of a research proposal , along with examples and templates to help you ace this step in your research journey.  

What is a Research Proposal ?  

A research proposal¹ ,²  can be defined as a formal report that describes your proposed research, its objectives, methodology, implications, and other important details. Research proposals are the framework of your research and are used to obtain approvals or grants to conduct the study from various committees or organizations. Consequently, research proposals should convince readers of your study’s credibility, accuracy, achievability, practicality, and reproducibility.   

With research proposals , researchers usually aim to persuade the readers, funding agencies, educational institutions, and supervisors to approve the proposal. To achieve this, the report should be well structured with the objectives written in clear, understandable language devoid of jargon. A well-organized research proposal conveys to the readers or evaluators that the writer has thought out the research plan meticulously and has the resources to ensure timely completion.  

Purpose of Research Proposals  

A research proposal is a sales pitch and therefore should be detailed enough to convince your readers, who could be supervisors, ethics committees, universities, etc., that what you’re proposing has merit and is feasible . Research proposals can help students discuss their dissertation with their faculty or fulfill course requirements and also help researchers obtain funding. A well-structured proposal instills confidence among readers about your ability to conduct and complete the study as proposed.  

Research proposals can be written for several reasons:³  

• To describe the importance of research in the specific topic  
• Address any potential challenges you may encounter  
• Showcase knowledge in the field and your ability to conduct a study  
• Apply for a role at a research institute  
• Convince a research supervisor or university that your research can satisfy the requirements of a degree program  
• Highlight the importance of your research to organizations that may sponsor your project  
• Identify implications of your project and how it can benefit the audience  

What Goes in a Research Proposal?    

Research proposals should aim to answer the three basic questions—what, why, and how.  

The What question should be answered by describing the specific subject being researched. It should typically include the objectives, the cohort details, and the location or setting.  

The Why question should be answered by describing the existing scenario of the subject, listing unanswered questions, identifying gaps in the existing research, and describing how your study can address these gaps, along with the implications and significance.  

The How question should be answered by describing the proposed research methodology, data analysis tools expected to be used, and other details to describe your proposed methodology.   

Research Proposal Example  

Here is a research proposal sample template (with examples) from the University of Rochester Medical Center. 4 The sections in all research proposals are essentially the same although different terminology and other specific sections may be used depending on the subject.  

Structure of a Research Proposal  

If you want to know how to make a research proposal impactful, include the following components:¹  

1. Introduction  

This section provides a background of the study, including the research topic, what is already known about it and the gaps, and the significance of the proposed research.  

2. Literature review  

This section contains descriptions of all the previous relevant studies pertaining to the research topic. Every study cited should be described in a few sentences, starting with the general studies to the more specific ones. This section builds on the understanding gained by readers in the Introduction section and supports it by citing relevant prior literature, indicating to readers that you have thoroughly researched your subject.  

3. Objectives  

Once the background and gaps in the research topic have been established, authors must now state the aims of the research clearly. Hypotheses should be mentioned here. This section further helps readers understand what your study’s specific goals are.  

4. Research design and methodology  

Here, authors should clearly describe the methods they intend to use to achieve their proposed objectives. Important components of this section include the population and sample size, data collection and analysis methods and duration, statistical analysis software, measures to avoid bias (randomization, blinding), etc.  

5. Ethical considerations  

This refers to the protection of participants’ rights, such as the right to privacy, right to confidentiality, etc. Researchers need to obtain informed consent and institutional review approval by the required authorities and mention this clearly for transparency.  

6. Budget/funding  

Researchers should prepare their budget and include all expected expenditures. An additional allowance for contingencies such as delays should also be factored in.  

7. Appendices  

This section typically includes information that supports the research proposal and may include informed consent forms, questionnaires, participant information, measurement tools, etc.  

8. Citations  

Important Tips for Writing a Research Proposal  

Writing a research proposal begins much before the actual task of writing. Planning the research proposal structure and content is an important stage, which if done efficiently, can help you seamlessly transition into the writing stage. 3,5  

The Planning Stage  

• Manage your time efficiently. Plan to have the draft version ready at least two weeks before your deadline and the final version at least two to three days before the deadline.
• What is the primary objective of your research?  
• Will your research address any existing gap?  
• What is the impact of your proposed research?  
• Do people outside your field find your research applicable in other areas?  
• If your research is unsuccessful, would there still be other useful research outcomes?  

  The Writing Stage  

• Create an outline with main section headings that are typically used.  
• Focus only on writing and getting your points across without worrying about the format of the research proposal , grammar, punctuation, etc. These can be fixed during the subsequent passes. Add details to each section heading you created in the beginning.   
• Ensure your sentences are concise and use plain language. A research proposal usually contains about 2,000 to 4,000 words or four to seven pages.  
• Don’t use too many technical terms and abbreviations assuming that the readers would know them. Define the abbreviations and technical terms.  
• Ensure that the entire content is readable. Avoid using long paragraphs because they affect the continuity in reading. Break them into shorter paragraphs and introduce some white space for readability.  
• Focus on only the major research issues and cite sources accordingly. Don’t include generic information or their sources in the literature review.  
• Proofread your final document to ensure there are no grammatical errors so readers can enjoy a seamless, uninterrupted read.  
• Use academic, scholarly language because it brings formality into a document.  
• Ensure that your title is created using the keywords in the document and is neither too long and specific nor too short and general.  
• Cite all sources appropriately to avoid plagiarism.  
• Make sure that you follow guidelines, if provided. This includes rules as simple as using a specific font or a hyphen or en dash between numerical ranges.  
• Ensure that you’ve answered all questions requested by the evaluating authority.  

Key Takeaways   

Here’s a summary of the main points about research proposals discussed in the previous sections:  

• A research proposal is a document that outlines the details of a proposed study and is created by researchers to submit to evaluators who could be research institutions, universities, faculty, etc.  
• Research proposals are usually about 2,000-4,000 words long, but this depends on the evaluating authority’s guidelines.  
• A good research proposal ensures that you’ve done your background research and assessed the feasibility of the research.  
• Research proposals have the following main sections—introduction, literature review, objectives, methodology, ethical considerations, and budget.  

Frequently Asked Questions  

Q1. How is a research proposal evaluated?  

A1. In general, most evaluators, including universities, broadly use the following criteria to evaluate research proposals . 6  

• Significance —Does the research address any important subject or issue, which may or may not be specific to the evaluator or university?  
• Content and design —Is the proposed methodology appropriate to answer the research question? Are the objectives clear and well aligned with the proposed methodology?  
• Sample size and selection —Is the target population or cohort size clearly mentioned? Is the sampling process used to select participants randomized, appropriate, and free of bias?  
• Timing —Are the proposed data collection dates mentioned clearly? Is the project feasible given the specified resources and timeline?  
• Data management and dissemination —Who will have access to the data? What is the plan for data analysis?  

Q2. What is the difference between the Introduction and Literature Review sections in a research proposal ?  

A2. The Introduction or Background section in a research proposal sets the context of the study by describing the current scenario of the subject and identifying the gaps and need for the research. A Literature Review, on the other hand, provides references to all prior relevant literature to help corroborate the gaps identified and the research need.  

Q3. How long should a research proposal be?  

A3. Research proposal lengths vary with the evaluating authority like universities or committees and also the subject. Here’s a table that lists the typical research proposal lengths for a few universities.  

Q4. What are the common mistakes to avoid in a research proposal ?  

A4. Here are a few common mistakes that you must avoid while writing a research proposal . 7  

• No clear objectives: Objectives should be clear, specific, and measurable for the easy understanding among readers.  
• Incomplete or unconvincing background research: Background research usually includes a review of the current scenario of the particular industry and also a review of the previous literature on the subject. This helps readers understand your reasons for undertaking this research because you identified gaps in the existing research.  
• Overlooking project feasibility: The project scope and estimates should be realistic considering the resources and time available.   
• Neglecting the impact and significance of the study: In a research proposal , readers and evaluators look for the implications or significance of your research and how it contributes to the existing research. This information should always be included.  
• Unstructured format of a research proposal : A well-structured document gives confidence to evaluators that you have read the guidelines carefully and are well organized in your approach, consequently affirming that you will be able to undertake the research as mentioned in your proposal.  
• Ineffective writing style: The language used should be formal and grammatically correct. If required, editors could be consulted, including AI-based tools such as Paperpal , to refine the research proposal structure and language.  

Thus, a research proposal is an essential document that can help you promote your research and secure funds and grants for conducting your research. Consequently, it should be well written in clear language and include all essential details to convince the evaluators of your ability to conduct the research as proposed.  

This article has described all the important components of a research proposal and has also provided tips to improve your writing style. We hope all these tips will help you write a well-structured research proposal to ensure receipt of grants or any other purpose.  

References  

• Sudheesh K, Duggappa DR, Nethra SS. How to write a research proposal? Indian J Anaesth. 2016;60(9):631-634. Accessed July 15, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5037942/  
• Writing research proposals. Harvard College Office of Undergraduate Research and Fellowships. Harvard University. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://uraf.harvard.edu/apply-opportunities/app-components/essays/research-proposals  
• What is a research proposal? Plus how to write one. Indeed website. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/research-proposal  
• Research proposal template. University of Rochester Medical Center. Accessed July 16, 2024. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/MediaLibraries/URMCMedia/pediatrics/research/documents/Research-proposal-Template.pdf  
• Tips for successful proposal writing. Johns Hopkins University. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://research.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Tips-for-Successful-Proposal-Writing.pdf  
• Formal review of research proposals. Cornell University. Accessed July 18, 2024. https://irp.dpb.cornell.edu/surveys/survey-assessment-review-group/research-proposals  
• 7 Mistakes you must avoid in your research proposal. Aveksana (via LinkedIn). Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/7-mistakes-you-must-avoid-your-research-proposal-aveksana-cmtwf/  

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

How to write a phd research proposal.

• What are the Benefits of Generative AI for Academic Writing?
• How to Avoid Plagiarism When Using Generative AI Tools
• What is Hedging in Academic Writing?  

How to Write Your Research Paper in APA Format

The future of academia: how ai tools are changing the way we do research, you may also like, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide), maintaining academic integrity with paperpal’s generative ai writing..., research funding basics: what should a grant proposal..., how to write an abstract in research papers..., how to write dissertation acknowledgements.

Free Al Office Suite with PDF Editor

Edit Word, Excel, and PPT for FREE.

Read, edit, and convert PDFs with the powerful PDF toolkit.

Microsoft-like interface, easy to use.

Windows • MacOS • Linux • iOS • Android

• Articles of Word

How to Write an Abstract - Steps with Examples

Writing reports, papers, and assignments is a significant part of college life, and it often involves complex writing and analysis. One of the most challenging aspects can be crafting an effective abstract. After completing your report, summarizing it concisely can seem daunting. In this guide, I’ll walk you through how to write an abstract for paper that clearly and effectively summarizes your work, making it easier for your readers to grasp the main points.

What to Include & How to Structure Your Abstract?

A.what to include.

An abstract serves as a concise summary of a research paper, providing readers with a quick overview of its essential aspects. It typically begins by setting the context and significance of the research, outlining the broader field and specific topic under study. Central to the abstract is a clear articulation of the research question or problem that the study addresses, emphasizing its relevance and importance within the discipline. Building upon existing literature, the abstract succinctly summarizes previous research while highlighting gaps or limitations that motivate the current study.

Context or Background: Briefly introduce the general and specific topics of your research.

Central Question or Problem: Clearly state the research question or problem addressed.

Previous Research: Summarize what is already known and highlight gaps or limitations.

Methods: Outline the research or analytical methods used.

Findings: Present the main findings or arguments.

Significance: Explain the implications or significance of your findings.

B.How to Structure

Introduction:

Begin with a sentence that sets the context and importance of your research topic.

Briefly mention the specific aspect of the topic that your paper focuses on.

Provide a concise summary of the methods used in your study.

Mention any unique approaches or innovations in your methodology.

Summarize the most significant findings of your research.

Highlight any unexpected results or patterns observed.

Conclusion:

Conclude with the significance of your findings.

Discuss how your research contributes to the field and suggest areas for future study.

C.Things to Avoid

Citing References: Avoid including citations or detailed literature reviews.

Detailed Explanations: Keep descriptions of methods and data concise.

Jargon and Technical Language: Use clear and accessible language to ensure understanding

Types of Abstract

There are two primary types of abstracts: descriptive and informative.

1.Descriptive Abstract:

A descriptive abstract provides a brief overview of the purpose and scope of the research without delving into specific details of findings or conclusions. It aims to give readers a snapshot of what the paper is about.

An example of a descriptive abstract would be where in a study analyzing economic homogamy among spouses, a descriptive abstract might introduce the topic and outline the general findings about increasing economic resemblance between partners without specifying the detailed methods or specific results.

2.Informative Abstract:

An informative abstract offers a comprehensive summary of the entire research paper, including the purpose, methods, results, and conclusions. It provides readers with a clear understanding of the study's objectives and outcomes.

For instance, in a research paper on reprogramming fibroblasts into induced cardiac progenitor cells, an informative abstract would detail the methods used (such as specific gene factors and signaling pathways), summarize the main findings (including the types of cells generated and their potential applications), and discuss the broader implications for cardiac regenerative therapy.

Both types of abstracts serve distinct purposes: descriptive abstracts give a broad overview suitable for quickly understanding the topic, while informative abstracts provide detailed insights into the research, making them ideal for readers seeking in-depth knowledge without reading the full paper.

How to Write an Abstract for paper in 4 Steps [With Examples]

Now that we know an abstract is simply a concise summary of our entire research, the next step is to learn how to write an abstract for a research paper. Remember, the structure of an abstract needs to be followed strictly, and it should be within 300 words to ensure it is impactful and fulfills its purpose. The structure includes:

Problem Statement (1-2 sentences)

Methodology (1-2 sentences)

Results (2-3 sentences)

Significance (1-2 sentences)

With this structure in mind, I will be writing an abstract on the topic 'Ethical Implications of Facial Recognition Technology in Public Surveillance'. To assist me, I will be using WPS Writer as my writing tool because it not only provides me with the necessary editing tools for writing my research paper but also utilizes WPS AI to save time and enhance the meaning of my abstract.

Problem Statement

So first of all, in an abstract, we have the Problem Statement. A problem statement, or research gap, serves as a concise description of the issue or challenge addressed in the research. Students and researchers often end up writing line after line when discussing the research gap, although just 1-2 lines will suffice.

Let's take a look at the draft I have written for the problem statement on WPS Writer.

To shorten this problem statement effectively while ensuring it describes the issue concisely, I'll use WPS AI for assistance. Here's how:

Step 1: Highlight the problem statement using your mouse.

Step 2: After highlighting the text, you will see a floating menu with quick edit tools. Click on the "WPS AI" icon.

Step 3: Upon clicking the WPS AI icon, a list of WPS AI options will appear. Select "Make Shorter".

Step 4: WPS AI will process the text, and once shortened, review it. If satisfactory, click “Replace”; otherwise, opt for “Rewrite” to refine further.

Step 5: With the problem statement shortened, I'll add a human touch by making final adjustments before moving to the next part of our abstract.

Methodology

Next up, we need to discuss the methods used during our research. This includes outlining the specific techniques, procedures, or approaches employed to gather data and analyze findings, ensuring transparency and replicability in scholarly work.

And now, with the help of WPS AI, I'll be shortening my methodology statement to make it more concise and fit my abstract.

Ensure to review any changes made because WPS AI is a writing assistant designed to help you write better, but reviewing is critical to ensure the end result meets your expectations.

After discussing the methodology, we present the results of our research. This section summarizes the key findings and outcomes obtained through the applied methods, providing a clear picture of what was discovered or achieved.

Similar to other sections, I have created a rough draft of my research findings, which I believe are important to include in my abstract.

Now with the assistance of WPS AI, I can further condense my draft. Remember, results can be a bit longer compared to other sections of our abstract, so I'll aim for 2-3 sentences to maintain relevance.

Significance

Finally, we need to discuss the significance of our research and its contributions to the field. This involves explaining how our findings will impact the topic of research and provide a foundation for future studies.

With my significance statement further shortened using WPS AI, I now have my complete abstract statement totaling over 220 words, providing a brief overview of my entire research.

Once you have completed writing your abstract, the next step is to include keywords—a crucial element in learning how to write an abstract for a project or research paper in APA style. When publishing your paper, it's essential to include these keywords at the end of the abstract.

They should highlight important aspects of your research, aiding readers in finding your paper during literature searches. APA Style guidelines specify the formatting rules for these keywords, ensuring consistency and clarity in scholarly publications.

Place keywords directly below the abstract.

Indent the first line of keywords by 0.5 inches.

Use an italicized heading for "Keywords:"

Separate each keyword with a comma and maintain standard font style for keywords.

Remember, the abstract is written once the entire research paper has been completed, so it is the final step before you submit your research paper for publication or to your college professor.

When inputting keywords, think from a reader's perspective about what they are searching for, and include those search terms as your keywords.

While writing your abstract, remember that your research findings are already completed, so the abstract is always in the present or past simple tense.

Avoid delving deeply into the problem when describing your problem statement.

Use verbs like "investigate, test, analyze, evaluate, calculate" to describe the purpose of your research.

In the results section, highlight the most important findings because sometimes research findings are extensive and it might leave you confused about which ones to include.

Mention any limitations encountered during your research.

Bonus Tips: How to Perfect your Abstract with WPS AI

When crafting your essay with WPS AI, you're setting yourself up for success. WPS AI offers a suite of tools designed to elevate your writing to new heights, ensuring your paper is not only well-written but also perfectly formatted and crystal clear. Whether you're brainstorming ideas or fine-tuning your final draft, WPS AI is your comprehensive writing assistant.

Content Generation and Idea Formation:

WPS AI aids in generating and refining ideas, helping you structure your thoughts cohesively. It provides guidance on developing strong arguments and organizing your essay logically, ensuring your content flows smoothly.

Grammar and Style Correction:

WPS AI acts as a meticulous proofreader, detecting and correcting grammatical errors, punctuation mistakes, and stylistic inconsistencies. It ensures your writing adheres to standard grammar rules and enhances readability.

Coherence Enhancement:

Beyond surface-level corrections, WPS AI enhances the coherence of your writing. It identifies areas where transitions between paragraphs or ideas could be smoother, ensuring your paper maintains a clear and logical progression of thought.

Clarity Check:

Clarity is paramount in effective writing. WPS AI evaluates the clarity of your sentences and paragraphs, suggesting improvements to eliminate ambiguity and enhance understanding. It helps refine your tone and ensures your message is conveyed effectively to your audience.

Formatting Assistance:

Formatting can often be a tedious task. WPS AI automates the process, ensuring your paper meets the required formatting guidelines effortlessly. Whether it's APA, MLA, Chicago, or any other style, WPS AI ensures your paper looks polished and professional.

Real-time Feedback and Iterative Improvement:

As you write, WPS AI provides real-time feedback, offering suggestions for improvement as you draft your essay. This iterative process allows you to refine your writing continuously, incorporating feedback on the go.

FAQs about writing an abstract for paper

1. is it necessary for an abstract to adhere to a standard structure.

No, an abstract does not always need to follow a standard structure. While a standard format offers familiarity, focusing on the most compelling aspects of your research is crucial. Here are some key points to keep in mind:

Significant Discoveries: If your research unveils groundbreaking results, prioritizing these can immediately capture attention, even if it diverges slightly from the traditional structure.

Innovative Method: Highlighting a fresh or distinct approach from the outset can captivate readers interested in your research methodology.

2. Does the use of technical jargon in an Abstract enhance the reader's comprehension?

Using too much technical language in an abstract usually doesn't help readers. Here's why it might cause trouble:

Excludes Readers: An excessive use of jargon can create a barrier, potentially alienating readers who could otherwise benefit from your research.

Hides Important Ideas: Sometimes, technical language makes it hard to understand your thoughts clearly. Utilizing clear and everyday language enhances your ability to communicate complex ideas effectively.

When to Incorporate Technical Language:

Clarify Terms: If technical terms are necessary, provide clear explanations upon their initial use.

Maintain Balance: Strive for clarity while demonstrating proficiency in the technical vocabulary of your field.

3. When should I write the Abstract?

Once you've finished your research, write the abstract as the final step. This allows you to concisely summarize your entire thesis, dissertation, or research paper, capturing all its main points and findings.

4. How long should an Abstract be?

Abstract lengths for theses and dissertations typically range between 200 and 300 words. Many universities enforce strict word limits, so it's crucial to check your institution's specific requirements before submitting your abstract.

Ease Your Academic Life With WPS Office

Writing a paper can be a challenging journey, but when you're creating your abstract, you're figuratively and literally wrapping it up. WPS Office is a great companion to have on this journey. From generating ideas to perfecting your final draft, WPS AI equips you with the tools and guidance on how to write an abstract for paper. It ensures that your essay not only meets academic standards but also stands out for its coherence, clarity, and impeccable presentation. Download WPS Office now and make your academic life easier.

• 1. How to Write a Call to Action - Steps with Examples
• 2. How to Write a Hook- Steps With Examples
• 3. How to Write A Literature Review - Steps with Examples
• 4. How to Write a Proposal [ Steps & Examples]
• 5. How to Write A thesis statement - Steps with Examples
• 6. How to Write an Argumentative Essay- Steps with Examples

15 years of office industry experience, tech lover and copywriter. Follow me for product reviews, comparisons, and recommendations for new apps and software.

Sign in or create account Learn more about signing in or creating an account with Scopus (opens in a new window)

To use this feature you must be a registered user of Scopus.

Scopus will soon cease the support of IE 9 and users are recommended to upgrade to the latest Internet Explorer, Firefox, or Chrome.

Browser bookmark URL length exceeded

To bookmark this page you need to remove one or more search terms or filters.

4-year publication window

Publication types.

CiteScore 2023 has been released. View CiteScore methodology

Excel file exported

See your downloaded file for more details

You have selected more than 1000 source results

Only the first 1000 results will be exported.

Filter refine list

• Clear filters

Display options

• Display only Open Access journals
• Counts for 4-year timeframe No minimum selected Enter number for Minimum citations Enter number for Minimum documents
• Citescore highest quartile
• Show only titles in top 10 percent
• 1st quartile
• 2nd quartile
• 3rd quartile
• 4th quartile

Source type

• Book Series
• Conference Proceedings
• Trade Publications

Source Result List

Scopus Source Browse and Source Title List are refreshed on a monthly basis as regards Source metadata (Title, ISSN, Publisher). New Sources are added twice a year (June and November).

For questions and remarks regarding the Scopus Source List refer to Help

• Select all sources on the page
• Select page

Sign in to Scopus

When signed in, registered Scopus users can save up to 50 lists for future use.

Learn more about lists

Grab your spot at the free arXiv Accessibility Forum

Help | Advanced Search

Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence

Title: the ai scientist: towards fully automated open-ended scientific discovery.

Abstract: One of the grand challenges of artificial general intelligence is developing agents capable of conducting scientific research and discovering new knowledge. While frontier models have already been used as aides to human scientists, e.g. for brainstorming ideas, writing code, or prediction tasks, they still conduct only a small part of the scientific process. This paper presents the first comprehensive framework for fully automatic scientific discovery, enabling frontier large language models to perform research independently and communicate their findings. We introduce The AI Scientist, which generates novel research ideas, writes code, executes experiments, visualizes results, describes its findings by writing a full scientific paper, and then runs a simulated review process for evaluation. In principle, this process can be repeated to iteratively develop ideas in an open-ended fashion, acting like the human scientific community. We demonstrate its versatility by applying it to three distinct subfields of machine learning: diffusion modeling, transformer-based language modeling, and learning dynamics. Each idea is implemented and developed into a full paper at a cost of less than $15 per paper. To evaluate the generated papers, we design and validate an automated reviewer, which we show achieves near-human performance in evaluating paper scores. The AI Scientist can produce papers that exceed the acceptance threshold at a top machine learning conference as judged by our automated reviewer. This approach signifies the beginning of a new era in scientific discovery in machine learning: bringing the transformative benefits of AI agents to the entire research process of AI itself, and taking us closer to a world where endless affordable creativity and innovation can be unleashed on the world's most challenging problems. Our code is open-sourced at this https URL

Submission history

Access paper:.

• Other Formats

References & Citations

• Google Scholar
• Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

• Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .

This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Published on 16.8.2024 in Vol 26 (2024)

Human-Comparable Sensitivity of Large Language Models in Identifying Eligible Studies Through Title and Abstract Screening: 3-Layer Strategy Using GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 for Systematic Reviews

Authors of this article:

Original Paper

• Kentaro Matsui 1, 2 , MD, PhD   ; 
• Tomohiro Utsumi 2, 3 , MD   ; 
• Yumi Aoki 4 , PhD   ; 
• Taku Maruki 5 , MD   ; 
• Masahiro Takeshima 6 , MD, PhD   ; 
• Yoshikazu Takaesu 7 , MD, PhD  

1 Department of Clinical Laboratory, National Center Hospital, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Kodaira, Japan

2 Department of Sleep-Wake Disorders, National Institute of Mental Health, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Kodaira, Japan

3 Department of Psychiatry, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

4 Graduate School of Nursing Science, St. Luke’s International University, Tokyo, Japan

5 Department of Neuropsychiatry, Kyorin University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

6 Department of Neuropsychiatry, Akita University Graduate School of Medicine, Akita, Japan

7 Department of Neuropsychiatry, Graduate School of Medicine, University of the Ryukyus, Okinawa, Japan

Corresponding Author:

Yoshikazu Takaesu, MD, PhD

Department of Neuropsychiatry

Graduate School of Medicine

University of the Ryukyus

Okinawa, 903-0215

Phone: 81 98 895 3331

Email: [email protected]

Background: The screening process for systematic reviews is resource-intensive. Although previous machine learning solutions have reported reductions in workload, they risked excluding relevant papers.

Objective: We evaluated the performance of a 3-layer screening method using GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 to streamline the title and abstract-screening process for systematic reviews. Our goal is to develop a screening method that maximizes sensitivity for identifying relevant records.

Methods: We conducted screenings on 2 of our previous systematic reviews related to the treatment of bipolar disorder, with 1381 records from the first review and 3146 from the second. Screenings were conducted using GPT-3.5 (gpt-3.5-turbo-0125) and GPT-4 (gpt-4-0125-preview) across three layers: (1) research design, (2) target patients, and (3) interventions and controls. The 3-layer screening was conducted using prompts tailored to each study. During this process, information extraction according to each study’s inclusion criteria and optimization for screening were carried out using a GPT-4–based flow without manual adjustments. Records were evaluated at each layer, and those meeting the inclusion criteria at all layers were subsequently judged as included.

Results: On each layer, both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 were able to process about 110 records per minute, and the total time required for screening the first and second studies was approximately 1 hour and 2 hours, respectively. In the first study, the sensitivities/specificities of the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 were 0.900/0.709 and 0.806/0.996, respectively. Both screenings by GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 judged all 6 records used for the meta-analysis as included. In the second study, the sensitivities/specificities of the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 were 0.958/0.116 and 0.875/0.855, respectively. The sensitivities for the relevant records align with those of human evaluators: 0.867-1.000 for the first study and 0.776-0.979 for the second study. Both screenings by GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 judged all 9 records used for the meta-analysis as included. After accounting for justifiably excluded records by GPT-4, the sensitivities/specificities of the GPT-4 screening were 0.962/0.996 in the first study and 0.943/0.855 in the second study. Further investigation indicated that the cases incorrectly excluded by GPT-3.5 were due to a lack of domain knowledge, while the cases incorrectly excluded by GPT-4 were due to misinterpretations of the inclusion criteria.

Conclusions: Our 3-layer screening method with GPT-4 demonstrated acceptable level of sensitivity and specificity that supports its practical application in systematic review screenings. Future research should aim to generalize this approach and explore its effectiveness in diverse settings, both medical and nonmedical, to fully establish its use and operational feasibility.

Introduction

Large language models (LLMs) with extensive parameters, honed on substantial textual data, have seen striking advancements recently. Following OpenAI’s third-generation Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT-3), LLMs now possess advanced competencies in various natural language processing tasks [ 1 ]. Among these, ChatGPT, which is built on GPT-3.5—an iteration that improves upon GPT-3 by integrating both supervised and reinforcement learning techniques—has received particular attention [ 2 , 3 ]. GPT-3.5 has shown exceptional performance in the medical domain, achieving remarkable results on medical licensing examinations across different regions [ 4 ]. Furthermore, GPT-4, the successor to GPT-3.5, has exhibited superior performance [ 5 ], with its contextual understanding abilities potentially exceeding those of humans [ 6 , 7 ]. Beyond its use for language editing [ 8 , 9 ], both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 have proven to be effective tools for analyzing and comprehending the abstracts of research papers, offering potential benefits in the screening process for systematic reviews.

Systematic reviews and subsequent meta-analyses bear crucial clinical significance. The screening of titles and abstracts is a crucial step in this process [ 10 - 13 ], often involving more than 1000 papers identified via targeted keyword searches [ 14 ]. This screening process can take approximately 1 hour for every 60-120 papers [ 10 ], which is a substantial drain on human and time resources. In addition, human error is inevitable in the screening process [ 15 - 17 ], and the number of such errors can increase as the amount of paper to be screened increases possibly due to fatigue and cognitive overload [ 18 , 19 ]. To mitigate this labor-intensive task, attempts have been made to use text mining and machine learning technologies [ 17 , 20 - 29 ]. Although these methods have successfully reduced the workload, they risk omitting relevant papers, which could result in a high false-negative rate. Specifically, several studies reported the exclusion of records that should have been included in the meta-analysis [ 20 , 21 , 23 , 29 ]. Consequently, using machine learning techniques, such as natural language processing, to assist with abstract screening has not yet become widely adopted [ 14 , 30 ]. For systematic reviews, maintaining high sensitivity for studies eligible for full-text assessment, ideally at 100% [ 10 ], is crucial if they are to be fully supplanted by an automated process.

With the advanced language-processing capabilities of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 [ 2 , 5 ], there has been an expectation of achieving higher accuracy in screening processes. Kohandel Gargari et al [ 31 ] conducted title and abstract screening using GPT-3.5, but the sensitivity for identifying relevant papers remained at a maximum of 69%, even after attempting various prompt modifications. Khraisha et al [ 32 ] explored the use of GPT-4 across different systematic review processes and found that the sensitivity for title and abstract screening ranged between 42% and 50%. Guo et al [ 33 ] have also demonstrated the use of GPT-4 in title and abstract screenings; however, the sensitivity for relevant papers was limited to 76%, highlighting the challenge of unintentionally excluding necessary records. Notably, Tran et al [ 34 ] used GPT-3.5 for title and abstract screening with rigorous prompt adjustments, achieving a high sensitivity of 97.1% for relevant papers. While this high-sensitivity level might already be suitable for practical use in the systematic review process, its specificity was limited to 37.7% [ 34 ].

The aim of this study is to develop a title- and abstract-screening method using GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 that achieves as high a sensitivity as possible. Although the method of using GPT-3.5 by Tran et al [ 34 ] achieved high sensitivity for identifying relevant papers, we aim to maintain high sensitivity while also improving specificity through a unique approach that incorporates GPT-4. To achieve this, we subdivided the process of determining inclusion for systematic reviews [ 11 ] involving 3 layers of screening. By breaking down the screening process into multiple steps, each addressing a specific aspect, we aimed to optimize the performance of the language models. In this study, we regarded the results of human screening as the gold standard and calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 screening results in comparison with them. Furthermore, we carefully examined the records that were erroneously excluded by GPT-3.5/GPT-4. This examination was conducted to assess the appropriateness of their exclusion.

Language Model Details

GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, LLMs used in this study, are accessible through ChatGPT. However, ChatGPT does not support processing multiple queries against the titles and abstracts of scholarly papers simultaneously. To address this limitation, we leveraged the application programming interfaces (APIs) of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, known as gpt-3.5-turbo and gpt-4-turbo-preview, respectively [ 35 ].

For gpt-3.5-turbo, we used the most current model available, gpt-3.5-turbo-0125. This model could be used at a low cost of US $0.50 per 1M tokens for input and US $1.50 per 1M tokens for output, with approximately 750 tokens corresponding to 1000 words [ 36 ]. Similarly, for GPT-4, we used the latest model available, gpt-4-0125-preview, which was available at a cost of US $10.00 per 1M tokens for input and US $30.00 per 1M tokens for output [ 36 ].

Calling the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 API

In this study, we used Google Spreadsheet and Google Apps Script to interface with the GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 APIs for batch processing. Specifically, we created the “GPT35” function to call the gpt-3.5-turbo-0125 API within Google Spreadsheet. Users can invoke this function by entering “=GPT35([prompt])” into a cell, enabling the intuitive batch processing of multiple titles and abstracts. Similarly, we established the “GPT4” function to access the gpt-4-0125-preview API.

Both the gpt-3.5-turbo-0125 and gpt-4-0125-preview have a parameter called “temperature,” which introduces “variability” in the responses—the higher the temperature, the greater the randomness, with a range between 0 and 2 [ 37 ]. As described later in this study, the decision to include or exclude records was delegated to GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. At the preliminary trials, it was observed that setting the temperature above 0 resulted in varying responses from one trial to another. In addition, setting the temperature above 0 can lead to unexpected responses. When instructed to respond with either “E” (for the exclusion) or “I” (for the inclusion), if the temperature is 0, the output will be strictly “E” or “I.” However, if the temperature is above 0, even if it is only 0.1, the response might be, for example, “The answer is ‘E’.” In light of these observations, and primarily to ensure reproducibility, this study fixed the temperature at 0 for all screenings. The Apps Script used in this study is shown in Multimedia Appendix 1 .

Process of Screening and Prompt Engineering

Generally, in a systematic review, a comprehensive examination is conducted on studies that address a relevant clinical question. After a comprehensive literature search is performed to identify all potential studies for review, each record is assessed to determine whether it addresses the clinical question [ 11 ]. In this study, we used either GPT-3.5 or GPT-4 to assess the inclusion or exclusion of relevant papers at each of the following three layers: (1) research design, (2) target population, and (3) intervention and control [ 11 ]. Records not deemed for exclusion at any of these layers were classified as “included.” We present the workflow of the process we conducted in Figure 1 .

The characteristics of the 2 systematic review papers [ 38 , 39 ] used in this study are summarized in Table 1 . The first paper by Takeshima et al [ 38 ] investigated the efficacy of bright light therapy in patients with bipolar disorder. In this study, the titles and abstracts of a total of 1381 records were initially screened in duplicate, with the task being divided between 2 pairs of independent evaluators. The first pair reviewed the initial 753 records, while the second pair assessed the remaining 628 records. Of these, 30 records were targeted for a full-text assessment, and eventually 6 records (encompassing 6 studies) were selected for meta-analysis. The second paper by Maruki et al [ 39 ] verified the difference in therapeutic effects between the usage of 2 types: second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) and mood stabilizers (MSs), versus the usage of either type alone, targeting patients with bipolar disorder. In this study, the titles and abstracts of a total of 3146 records were initially screened in duplicate, with the screening divided between 2 pairs of evaluators. The first pair reviewed the initial 1694 records, while the second pair evaluated the remaining 1452 records. Of these, 96 records were targeted for a full-text assessment, and eventually 9 records (encompassing 5 studies) were selected for meta-analysis. We used the data on the inclusion or exclusion decisions of each human evaluator made prior to reaching a consensus among evaluators.

The screening process was divided into three layers: (1) research design, (2) target population, and (3) intervention and control. The prompts for each layer must be specifically tailored to each systematic review. At this point, manual prompt adjustments could lead to issues with reproducibility in future research. Therefore, in this study, we used GPT-4 (gpt-4-0125-preview, temperature=0) to automatically extract the information and generate the content for the prompts related to “research design,” “target population,” “intervention,” and “control.” The prompts used for extraction, along with the content defined for “research design,” “target population,” “intervention,” and “control,” are detailed in Textbox 1 . In this study, we extracted information by inserting the text from the “inclusion criteria” paragraph of the Methods section of each paper into the specified location in the prompt ( Textbox 1 ).

The structure of the prompts for each of the 3 layers is shown in Textbox 2 . Within these prompts, we specified that if a decision cannot be made, records should be considered potentially eligible for full-text assessment and not excluded. In this study, the information supplied to GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 was limited to the titles and abstracts of the records; details such as authors, their affiliations, or journal names were not included in the prompts.

In the screening process using GPT-3.5 or GPT-4, we initially verified whether the research design of all records satisfied the inclusion criteria. For records not excluded in the first layer, we subsequently confirmed whether the target population aligned with the inclusion criteria. Moreover, for records that were not excluded in the first and second layers, we assessed whether both the intervention and control groups met the inclusion criteria ( Figure 1 ).

• Research design: [insert your answer here]
• Target population: [insert your answer here]
• Intervention: [insert your answer here]
• Control: [insert your answer here]
• Research design: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) at the individual or cluster level, including crossover studies reporting results from the first period.
• Target population: Patients with a clinical diagnosis of bipolar disorder (BD), type I or type II.
• Intervention: Any kind of light therapy, including 'light therapy,' 'bright light therapy,' 'phototherapy,' or chronotherapy in any intensity and color.
• Control: Sham treatment (e.g., low-intensity light, dim red light, or negative ion) or treatment as usual (no light treatment).
• Research design: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) at the individual or cluster level, including crossover studies before crossover
• Target population: Participants diagnosed with bipolar I or II depression, including mixed features and/or rapid cycling.
• Intervention: Adjunctive therapy with second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) or mood stabilizers (MS) during baseline treatment with SGA or MS.
• Control: Adjunctive therapy with a placebo during baseline treatment with second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) or mood stabilizers (MS).
• Prompt for research design#Title and abstractTitle: [ Title of the record was inserted here ]Abstract: [ Abstract of the record was inserted here ]#Research design[ The ‘research design’ specified in Textbox 1 was inserted here ]#QueryYou are a researcher rigorously screening titles and abstracts of scientific papers for inclusion or exclusion in a review paper.Does the paper with the above title and abstract meet the specified research design? If yes, highly suspected, or difficult to determine, answer 'I'. If not, answer 'E'.#RulesYou can reply using only 'E' or 'I'.#Your answer:
• Prompt for target population#Title and AbstractTitle: [ Title of the record was inserted here ]Abstract: [ Abstract of the record was inserted here ]#Target population[ The ‘target population’ specified in Textbox 1 was inserted here ]#QueryYou are a researcher rigorously screening titles and abstracts of scientific papers for inclusion or exclusion in a review paper.Does the paper with the above title and abstract meet the specified target population? If yes, highly suspected, or difficult to determine, answer ‘I’. If not, answer ‘E’.#RulesYou can reply using only ‘E’ or ‘I’.#Your answer:
• Prompt for intervention and control#Title and abstractTitle: [ Title of the record was inserted here ]Abstract: [ Abstract of the record was inserted here ]#Intervention[ The ‘intervention’ specified in Textbox 1 was inserted here ]#Control[ The ‘control’ specified in Textbox 1 was inserted here ]#QueryYou are a researcher rigorously screening titles and abstracts of scientific papers for inclusion or exclusion in a review paper.Does the paper with the above title and abstract meet the specified intervention and control criteria? If yes, highly suspected, or difficult to determine, answer 'I'. If not, answer 'E'.#RulesYou can reply using only 'E' or 'I'.#Your answer:

Data Analysis

In this study, we analyzed the results from human evaluators of systematic review papers, comparing these with the records identified by GPT-3.5 or GPT-4. We considered the records included in the full-text assessment to be correct. We assessed the inclusion or exclusion decisions made by each human evaluator (before consensus was reached) against those determined by GPT-3.5 or GPT-4, focusing on sensitivity and specificity. Sensitivity was defined as the proportion of correctly identified eligible records for full-text assessment by human evaluators, GPT-3.5, or GPT-4. Formally, sensitivity is calculated as follows:

Sensitivity = True positives / (True positives + False negatives)

True positives = Number of records correctly identified as eligible

False negatives = Number of records incorrectly identified as ineligible.

Similarly, specificity was defined as the proportion of correctly identified ineligible records (for full-text assessment) by human evaluators, GPT-3.5, or GPT-4. Formally, specificity is calculated as follows:

Specificity = True negatives / (True negatives + False positives)

True negatives = Number of records correctly identified as ineligible

False Positives = Number of records incorrectly identified as eligible.

For records eligible for full-text assessment but excluded by either GPT-3.5 or GPT-4, we reviewed the title and the abstract to assess whether the exclusion decision was justified. Following this review, we recalculated sensitivity and specificity after adjusting for these justified exclusions. Furthermore, for records that were incorrectly excluded by GPT-3.5 or GPT-4, we conducted a narrative verification of the erroneous judgments by asking each LLM to explain the reasons behind their decisions. We modified the prompt used for screening ( Textbox 2 ) by replacing the “#Rules” statement with “Specify the reason for your answer.” This modification allowed GPT-3.5 or GPT-4 to provide their judgment results along with the underlying reasons.

Ethical Considerations

This study used only publicly available data from research papers and does not involve human subjects or personal data. Therefore, it does not require a human subject ethics review or exemption.

Results on Takeshima et al Paper

Figure 2 [ 38 ] shows the number of records excluded by GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 at each layer of research design, target population, and intervention and control, applied to records in the paper by Takeshima et al [ 38 ].

GPT-3.5 excluded 84 records at the research design layer, 877 records at the target population layer, and 0 record at the intervention and control layer, ultimately determining 420 out of 1382 records for inclusion. None of the 6 records (including 6 papers) that were included in the meta-analysis were excluded by GPT-3.5. The sensitivity for included records was 0.900 and the specificity was 0.709. Among the eligible records for full-text assessment, GPT-3.5 classified 3 (10.0%) records as excluded. Of these, the exclusion of 2 records by GPT-3.5 was justified, while the remaining 1 (3.3%) record was deemed to require full-text assessment ( Table 2 ). After adjustments for these justified judgments ( Multimedia Appendix 2 ), the sensitivity improved to 0.966 and the specificity remained at 0.710. For the one record that GPT-3.5 determined to be excluded at the target population layer, it was suggested that GPT-3.5 concluded that the record “included both bipolar disorder and unipolar mood disorder, which did not match the selection criteria.”

a Number of records for which exclusion was not justified.

GPT-4 excluded 589 records at the research design layer, 760 records at the target population layer, and 1 record at the intervention and control layer, ultimately determining 31 out of 1381 records for inclusion. None of the 6 records (including 6 papers) that were included in the meta-analysis were excluded by GPT-4. The sensitivity for included records was 0.806 and the specificity was 0.996. Among the eligible records for full-text assessment, GPT-4 classified 6 (20.0%) records as excluded. Of these, the exclusion of 5 records by GPT-4 was justified, while the remaining 1 (3.3%) record was considered to require full-text assessment ( Table 2 ). After adjustments for these justified judgments ( Multimedia Appendix 2 ), the sensitivity improved to 0.962 and the specificity remained at 0.996. GPT-4 included all 6 records (including 6 papers) that were included in the meta-analysis. For the one record that GPT-4 judged to be excluded at the research design layer, it was revealed that GPT-4 deduced that “although this study mentioned registration in an RCT, it investigated the associations between sleep, physical activity, and circadian rhythm indicators” (from the perspective of whether to include the study in the meta-analysis, GPT-4’s judgment is likely to be correct; however, considering the purpose of the initial screening, we determined that it would be appropriate to include the study).

Results of the Paper by Maruki et al

Figure 3 [ 39 ] shows the number of records excluded by GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 at each layer of research design, target population, and intervention and control, applied to records in the Maruki et al [ 39 ] paper.

GPT-3.5 excluded 220 records at the research design layer, 126 records at the target population layer, and 10 records at the intervention and control layer, ultimately determining 2790 out of 3146 records for inclusion. None of the 9 records (including 9 papers) that were included in the meta-analysis were excluded by GPT-3.5. The sensitivity for included records was 0.958 and the specificity was 0.116. Among the eligible records for full-text assessment, GPT-3.5 classified 4 (4.2%) records as excluded. None of these records’ exclusion by GPT-3.5 was justified, and all were considered to require full-text assessment ( Table 3 and Multimedia Appendix 2 ). For the 2 records that GPT-3.5 inferred to be excluded at the research design layer, it was revealed that GPT-3.5 determined that “although they were RCTs, either the individual or cluster level was not specified” for both records. For the 2 records that GPT-3.5 deemed to be excluded at the target population layer, it was suggested that GPT-3.5 surmised that “although the records involved bipolar disorder, they did not match the selection criteria due to the presence of comorbidities (one record had generalized anxiety disorder, and the other had alcohol dependence).”

GPT-4 excluded 1287 records at the research design layer, 503 records at the target population layer, and 830 records at the intervention and control layer, ultimately determining 526 out of 3146 records for inclusion. None of the 9 records (including 9 papers) that were included in the meta-analysis were excluded by GPT-4. The sensitivity for included records was 0.875 and the specificity was 0.855. Among the eligible records for full-text assessment, GPT-4 classified 12 (12.5%) records as excluded. Of these, the exclusion of 8 records by GPT-4 was justified, while the remaining 4 (4.2%) records were considered to require full-text assessment ( Table 3 ). After adjustments for these justified judgments ( Multimedia Appendix 2 ), the sensitivity improved to 0.943 and the specificity remained at 0.855. “For the one record that GPT-4 determined to be excluded at the target population layer, it was suggested that GPT-4 inferred that ‘although the record involved bipolar disorder, it did not match the selection criteria due to the presence of a comorbidity (alcohol dependence).’ For the three records that GPT-4 judged to be excluded at the Intervention and control layer, in each case, GPT-4 cited the reason for exclusion as ‘the intervention criteria are the addition of either SGA or MS to SGA or MS, but this study does not mention the use of SGA.’”

In the list used in the paper by Maruki et al [ 39 ], there were a total of 355 records where part of the title and abstract were corrupted into irrelevant Chinese characters (eg, “This was an eight窶陣eek, open窶人abel, prospective study”). Despite these errors, all cases could be appropriately discerned, likely due to the context-sensitive judgment capability of GPT-3.5 and GPT-4.

Comparison of GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and Human Evaluators

Both the study by Takeshima et al [ 38 ] and the study by Maruki et al [ 39 ] involved 2 individuals conducting screening for the initial segment, while a different set of 2 individuals was responsible for the screening of the latter segment. The sensitivity and specificity of human evaluators and GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 for each segment are shown in Table 4 . The adjusted results, in cases where the exclusion of GPT-3.5 or GPT-4 was justified, are shown in the numbers within parentheses ( Table 4 ).

a LLMs: large language models.

b Not applicable.

c Values after adjusting for cases where exclusion was justified.

Time and Cost Required for Screenings

In our Google Spreadsheet setup, both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 managed to process approximately 110 records per minute across each of the 3 layers. Consequently, the estimated ideal completion time was between 20 and 30 minutes for the study by Takeshima et al [ 38 ], and between 60 and 80 minutes for the study by Maruki et al [ 39 ]. However, in practice, due to errors with the Google Spreadsheet and API, the screening process took about 1 hour for the study by Takeshima et al [ 38 ] and about 2 hours in total for the study by Maruki et al [ 39 ]. Furthermore, due to daily API call limits, the work had to be spread out over 3 days. The screening for these 2 studies incurred a total cost of US $59, with US $4 for calls to GPT-3.5 and US $55 for calls to GPT-4.

Principal Findings

This study demonstrates the use of a 3-layer screening method using GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 for title and abstract screenings in systematic reviews, highlighting its remarkable speed and sensitivity comparable with that of human evaluators. However, GPT-3.5 demonstrated low specificity for relevant records, rendering it less practical. In contrast, the use of GPT-4 showed both high sensitivity and specificity, particularly where adjustments for justified exclusions led to an improvement in sensitivity. Although achieving 100% sensitivity remained unattainable, a 3-layer screening method with GPT-4 may potentially be practical for use in the systematic review process and can reduce human labor.

Previous research demonstrating the effectiveness of automated screening using text mining has encountered sensitivity issues [ 20 - 29 ]. Specifically, the exclusion of important studies that should have been included in their meta-analysis [ 20 , 21 , 23 , 29 ], a limitation not observed in our approach, hampered their application to clinical practice. False negatives in machine learning–based screening can arise from several factors: complexity in research design, characteristics of the target demographic, types of interventions, complexity in selection criteria, a significant scarcity of relevant records within the data set (leading to data imbalance), and inconsistency in the terminology used for judgment [ 21 , 23 , 29 ]. Our method using GPT-3.5 or GPT-4 was able to address issues related to data set imbalance and terminology inconsistency, as we used the same prompt across records, and assess the inclusion or exclusion one by one. In addition, previous text mining screenings may not have effectively addressed garbled text, such as “open-label” mistakenly appearing as “open窶人abel” [ 40 ], an issue that LLMs can potentially mitigate through their attention mechanisms [ 41 ]. Moreover, the outstanding knowledge base of GPT-4 [ 6 , 7 ] likely helped address the complexity in research design, target demographics, and intervention, as well as selection criteria—areas where GPT-3.5 might have fallen short. These distinctions possibly account for the notable differences in specificity observed between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4. Recently, Guo et al [ 33 ] conducted title and abstract screening using GPT-4. Their approach diverges from our 3-layer method; it integrated inclusion and exclusion criteria within the context, generating decisions and reasoning through a single prompt. While we believe that our 3-layer method could potentially offer greater sensitivity than theirs, it remains difficult to definitively assert a significant improvement in sensitivity over the method by Guo et al [ 33 ], given the limited sample size and the differences in data sets. Tran and colleagues’ approach [ 34 ], despite using GPT-3.5, demonstrated remarkable sensitivity. It is important to note, however, that the manual creation of their highly effective prompt raises questions regarding its replicability and broader applicability.

Both human-conducted and LLM-conducted systematic reviews have their inherent pitfalls. Errors made by humans are inevitable, with their accuracy estimated to be around 10% [ 15 ], and slightly higher for false exclusions, at approximately 13%-14% [ 16 , 17 ]. These values represent the performance of experts in the relevant field, and the accuracy may be lower for individuals with less expertise or shallow screening experience; therefore, guidelines have recommended piloting and training the abstract screening team [ 12 ]. In this study, we observed that human evaluation in the paper by Takeshima et al [ 38 ] exhibited slightly more false negatives than that in the paper by Maruki et al [ 39 ]. Although the reasons for the judgment discrepancies were not investigated in this study’s data set, they may be attributed to the larger volume of records screened [ 14 ] and the potentially more complex and challenging research question in the paper by Maruki et al [ 39 ]. Using 2 reviewers to screen records can significantly lower the likelihood of false negatives [ 16 ] and has been recommended [ 11 , 13 ]. Yet, simultaneously, there has been a case that the systematic review screenings, albeit rare, are conducted by a single reviewer, because of time constraints [ 13 , 42 ]. Hence, the unavoidable errors and substantial time and effort required for screening represent significant drawbacks of human screening in systematic reviews [ 10 , 13 ].

Conversely, methods using LLMs also present several drawbacks. One primary concern is their susceptibility to misinformation and quality issues inherent in their training data [ 43 ]. Notably, in this study, the specificity of the GPT-3.5 screenings in Maruki et al [ 39 ] paper was markedly low. While the causes are not definitive, this may be attributed to an insufficient understanding of bipolar disorder, MSs, and second-generation antipsychotics. Tran and colleagues [ 34 ] incorporated relevant knowledge into their manually created prompts; it might have enhanced sensitivity but not specificity; and this could also be due to GPT-3.5’s knowledge limitations. Furthermore, the decision-making processes of LLMs lack transparency, making them difficult to interpret [ 43 ]. This lack of interpretability is compounded by the “grounding problem,” where LLMs struggle to grasp concrete facts and real-world scenarios due to their lack of real-world experiences and sensory input [ 1 , 44 ]. We attempted to verify incorrectly excluded records by querying GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 with the original screening prompts, their responses, and justifications. Our findings revealed that GPT-3.5’s lower accuracy was primarily due to a lack of knowledge about the target domain, while GPT-4’s incorrect exclusions were mainly due to misinterpretations of the inclusion criteria. These findings highlight the ongoing challenges in understanding and interpreting the decision-making processes of LLMs. Although GPT-4 demonstrates advancements in comprehension, factuality, specificity, and inference, it is still more susceptible to factual errors [ 45 ]. In addition, it has been suggested that LLMs’ accuracy diminishes with longer prompts [ 46 ]; lengthy abstracts might have contributed to decreased accuracy in decision-making. A potential future risk is that the normalization of AI-based judgments could result in the oversight of human expert verification, potentially diminishing the quality of systematic reviews.

On the positive side, compared with the human screening time reported in previous studies [ 10 ], our method enabled remarkably faster screening. Although our approach uses a 3-layer structure, which might seem time-consuming at first glance, by limiting GPT-3.5/GPT-4 responses to “E” (Exclude) or “I” (Include), we efficiently screened a large volume of records in batch. Unlike humans, LLMs do not experience fatigue and subsequent decline in performance; moreover, they are presumed to have better reproducibility in their judgments. While using GPT-4’s API comes with associated costs [ 36 ], the increased efficiency compared with human effort more than compensates for these expenses. Using LLMs for title and abstract screening could also enable screening a much larger number of records, previously deemed impractical due to time limitations. Our 3-layer method using GPT-4 exhibits high sensitivity and a useful level of specificity and yet opportunities for further refinement exist. Future studies could enhance accuracy through methods such as optimizing prompts [ 47 ] and integrating multiple LLMs for decision assessment [ 48 ], which may contribute to higher precision. In the meantime, swift advancements in LLM technology are set to continuously evolve; future breakthroughs in LLMs may readily overcome our current challenges—possibly, only by a simple prompt.

Limitations

This study has some limitations. First, the 2 systematic reviews used in this investigation [ 38 , 39 ] were confined to clinical studies within psychiatry, limiting the generalizability of our findings. In addition, the sample size was small, and the investigation remained exploratory, with the results lacking statistical substantiation. Future studies should aim to replicate these findings across a broader range of medical fields and specialized domains to enhance their applicability and reliability. Second, the artificial intelligence industry is progressing rapidly, with information becoming obsolete within a matter of months or even weeks. The models we used in this study, gpt-3.5-turbo-0125 and gpt-4-0125-preview, are currently the most up-to-date. However, updates to these models might alter screening outcomes. Third, to ensure consistency in our findings, we set the temperature parameter to 0. However, a temperature of 0 does not always guarantee absolute uniformity in output sentences [ 35 ]. However, our observations indicate no variation in results across multiple tests with the same model in this study. Fourth, this study did not investigate the discrepancies in screening results between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, nor did it examine the impact of prompt variations on performance. In addition, this research did not directly compare the performance of the proposed approach with existing systematic literature review strategies. Furthermore, this study was not designed to explore the risks associated with using LLMs for screening purposes. Finally, gpt-3.5-turbo-0125’s training data include information up to September 2021, whereas gpt-4-0125-preview’s training data extend to December 2023 [ 35 ]. Consequently, the systematic review paper by Takeshima et al [ 38 ] might have been incorporated into GPT-3.5’s training data set, with both systematic review papers possibly included in GPT-4’s data set. Nevertheless, as the study’s prompts did not explicitly reference these reviews, we consider that their impact is minimal.

Conclusions

We developed a practical screening method using GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 in the title- and abstract-screening process of systematic reviews. Our 3-layer method not only achieved better sensitivity for relevant records than previous machine learning–based screening methods [ 20 , 21 , 23 , 29 ] but also demonstrated a remarkable potential to reduce human reviewers’ workload significantly. Although GPT-3.5 showed lower specificity, which may limit its applicability, the use of GPT-4 within our method yielded sensitivity comparable with human evaluators, making it suitable for use in systematic review screenings. Despite the focus on psychiatric fields and the small sample size of our study, our findings highlight the potential for broader application. We emphasize the importance of further validation across multiple domains to establish a universal screening methodology. Concurrently, developing more effective approaches in response to the advancing capabilities of LLMs is warranted in future research.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) KAKENHI (grant 22K15778). During the preparation of this work, the authors used ChatGPT (GPT-4 and GPT-4o, by OpenAI), Claude (Claude 3 Opus, by Anthropic), and Gemini (Gemini 1.5 Pro, by Google) to enhance the readability and proofread the English text. After using these services, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and took full responsibility for the content of the publication.

Conflicts of Interest

None declared.

Script for the Google Spreadsheet.

Records eligible for full paper screening but excluded by GPT-3.5 or GPT-4.

• Brown TB, Mann B, Ryder N, Subbiah M, Kaplan JD, Dhariwal P, et al. Language models are few-shot learners. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 2020;33:1877-1901.
• Ouyang L, Wu J, Jiang X, Almeida D, Wainwright CL, Mishkin P, et al. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 2022;35:27730-27744. [ CrossRef ]
• Introducing ChatGPT. URL: https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt [accessed 2023-07-01]
• Levin G, Horesh N, Brezinov Y, Meyer R. Performance of ChatGPT in medical examinations: a systematic review and a meta-analysis. BJOG. 2024;131(3):378-380. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• GPT-4. URL: https://openai.com/research/gpt-4 [accessed 2024-02-29]
• Bojic L, Kovacevic P, Cabarkapa M. GPT-4 surpassing human performance in linguistic pragmatics. arXiv. Preprint posted online. Dec 15, 2023.
• Eriksen AV, Möller S, Ryg J. Use of GPT-4 to diagnose complex clinical cases. NEJM AI. 2023;1(1):AIp2300031. [ CrossRef ]
• Kim SG. Using ChatGPT for language editing in scientific articles. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023;45(1):13. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Matsui K, Koda M, Yoshida K. Implications of nonhuman "Authors". JAMA. 2023;330(6):566. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Lefebvre C, Glanville J, Briscoe S, Littlewood A, Marshall C, Metzendorf MI, et al. Searching for and selecting studies. In: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. New York, NY. John Wiley & Sons; 2019:67-107.
• Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. New York, NY. John Wiley & Sons; 2019.
• Polanin JR, Pigott TD, Espelage DL, Grotpeter JK. Best practice guidelines for abstract screening large‐evidence systematic reviews and meta‐analyses. Res Synth Methods. 2019;10(3):330-342. [ CrossRef ]
• Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n160. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• O'Hearn K, MacDonald C, Tsampalieros A, Kadota L, Sandarage R, Jayawarden SK, et al. Evaluating the relationship between citation set size, team size and screening methods used in systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21(1):142. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Wang Z, Nayfeh T, Tetzlaff J, O'Blenis P, Murad MH. Error rates of human reviewers during abstract screening in systematic reviews. PLoS One. 2020;15(1):e0227742. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Gartlehner G, Affengruber L, Titscher V, Noel-Storr A, Dooley G, Ballarini N, et al. Single-reviewer abstract screening missed 13 percent of relevant studies: a crowd-based, randomized controlled trial. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020;121:20-28. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Wilson E, Cruz F, Maclean D, Ghanawi J, McCann SK, Brennan PM, et al. Screening for in vitro systematic reviews: a comparison of screening methods and training of a machine learning classifier. Clin Sci (Lond). 2023;137(2):181-193. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Bannach-Brown A, Przybyła P, Thomas J, Rice ASC, Ananiadou S, Liao J, et al. Machine learning algorithms for systematic review: reducing workload in a preclinical review of animal studies and reducing human screening error. Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):23. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Cierco Jimenez R, Lee T, Rosillo N, Cordova R, Cree IA, Gonzalez A, et al. Machine learning computational tools to assist the performance of systematic reviews: a mapping review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022;22(1):322. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Shemilt I, Simon A, Hollands GJ, Marteau TM, Ogilvie D, O'Mara-Eves A, et al. Pinpointing needles in giant haystacks: use of text mining to reduce impractical screening workload in extremely large scoping reviews. Res Synth Methods. 2014;5(1):31-49. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Rathbone J, Hoffmann T, Glasziou P. Faster title and abstract screening? Evaluating Abstrackr, a semi-automated online screening program for systematic reviewers. Syst Rev. 2015;4:80. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Olofsson H, Brolund A, Hellberg C, Silverstein R, Stenström K, Österberg M, et al. Can abstract screening workload be reduced using text mining? User experiences of the tool Rayyan. Res Synth Methods. 2017;8(3):275-280. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Gates A, Johnson C, Hartling L. Technology-assisted title and abstract screening for systematic reviews: a retrospective evaluation of the Abstrackr machine learning tool. Syst Rev. 2018;7(1):45. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Gartlehner G, Wagner G, Lux L, Affengruber L, Dobrescu A, Kaminski-Hartenthaler A, et al. Assessing the accuracy of machine-assisted abstract screening with DistillerAI: a user study. Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):277. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Gates A, Gates M, Sebastianski M, Guitard S, Elliott SA, Hartling L. The semi-automation of title and abstract screening: a retrospective exploration of ways to leverage abstrackr's relevance predictions in systematic and rapid reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20(1):139. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Hamel C, Kelly SE, Thavorn K, Rice DB, Wells GA, Hutton B. An evaluation of DistillerSR's machine learning-based prioritization tool for title/abstract screening—impact on reviewer-relevant outcomes. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20(1):256. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Reddy SM, Patel S, Weyrich M, Fenton J, Viswanathan M. Comparison of a traditional systematic review approach with review-of-reviews and semi-automation as strategies to update the evidence. Syst Rev. 2020;9(1):243. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Pham B, Jovanovic J, Bagheri E, Antony J, Ashoor H, Nguyen TT, et al. Text mining to support abstract screening for knowledge syntheses: a semi-automated workflow. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):156. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Valizadeh A, Moassefi M, Nakhostin-Ansari A, Hosseini Asl SH, Saghab Torbati M, Aghajani R, et al. Abstract screening using the automated tool rayyan: results of effectiveness in three diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022;22(1):160. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• O'Connor AM, Tsafnat G, Thomas J, Glasziou P, Gilbert SB, Hutton B. A question of trust: can we build an evidence base to gain trust in systematic review automation technologies? Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):143. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Kohandel Gargari O, Mahmoudi MH, Hajisafarali M, Samiee R. Enhancing title and abstract screening for systematic reviews with GPT-3.5 turbo. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2024;29(1):69-70. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Khraisha Q, Put S, Kappenberg J, Warraitch A, Hadfield K. Can large language models replace humans in systematic reviews? Evaluating GPT-4's efficacy in screening and extracting data from peer-reviewed and grey literature in multiple languages. Res Synth Methods. 2024;15(4):616-626. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Guo E, Gupta M, Deng J, Park YJ, Paget M, Naugler C. Automated paper screening for clinical reviews using large language models: data analysis study. J Med Internet Res. 2024;26:e48996. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Tran VT, Gartlehner G, Yaacoub S, Boutron I, Schwingshackl L, Stadelmaier J, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of using GPT-3.5 turbo models for title and abstract screening in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2024;177(6):791-799. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Models. URL: https://platform.openai.com/docs/models [accessed 2024-02-29]
• Pricing. URL: https://openai.com/pricing [accessed 2024-03-06]
• API Reference. URL: https://platform.openai.com/docs/api-reference/ [accessed 2024-02-29]
• Takeshima M, Utsumi T, Aoki Y, Wang Z, Suzuki M, Okajima I, et al. Efficacy and safety of bright light therapy for manic and depressive symptoms in patients with bipolar disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2020;74(4):247-256. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Maruki T, Utsumi T, Takeshima M, Fujiwara Y, Matsui M, Aoki Y, et al. Efficacy and safety of adjunctive therapy to lamotrigine, lithium, or valproate monotherapy in bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Bipolar Disord. 2022;10(1):24. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Benchimol J, Kazinnik S, Saadon Y. Text mining methodologies with R: An application to central bank texts. Machine Learn with Appl. 2022;8:100286. [ CrossRef ]
• Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, et al. Attention is all you need. Adv Neural Inf Process syst. 2017;30:5998-6008.
• Nussbaumer-Streit B, Mayr V, Dobrescu AI, Chapman A, Persad E, Klerings I, et al. Quarantine alone or in combination with other public health measures to control COVID-19: a rapid review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;4(4):CD013574. [ FREE Full text ] [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Wang B, Xie Q, Pei J, Chen Z, Tiwari P, Li Z, et al. Pre-trained language models in biomedical domain: a systematic survey. ACM Comput Surv. 2023;56(3):1-52. [ CrossRef ]
• Mollo DC, Millière R. The vector grounding problem. arXiv. Preprint posted online. Apr 04, 2023.
• Zheng S, Huang J. Chang KC-C. why does chatgpt fall short in providing truthful answers. arXiv. Preprint posted online. Dec 03, 2023.
• Levy M, Jacoby A, Goldberg Y. Same task, more tokens: the impact of input length on the reasoning performance of large language models. arXiv. Preprint posted online. Jul 10, 2024.
• Giray L. Prompt engineering with ChatGPT: a guide for academic writers. Ann Biomed Eng. 2023;51(12):2629-2633. [ CrossRef ] [ Medline ]
• Li J, Zhang Q, Yu Y, Fu Q, Ye D. More agents is all you need. arXiv. Preprint posted online. Feb 03, 2024.

Abbreviations

Edited by S Ma; submitted 14.09.23; peer-reviewed by D Fraile Navarro, T Nguyen, A Nakhostin-Ansari; comments to author 23.01.24; revised version received 10.03.24; accepted 25.06.24; published 16.08.24.

©Kentaro Matsui, Tomohiro Utsumi, Yumi Aoki, Taku Maruki, Masahiro Takeshima, Yoshikazu Takaesu. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 16.08.2024.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (ISSN 1438-8871), is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://www.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

Order of Pages

All papers, including student papers, generally include a title page, text, and references. They may include additional elements such as tables and figures depending on the assignment. Student papers generally do not include an abstract unless requested.

Arrange the pages of an APA Style paper in this order:

Order of pages is covered in the seventh edition APA Style manuals in the Publication Manual Section 2.17 and the Concise Guide Section 1.16

In general, start each section on a new page. However, the order of pages is flexible in these cases:

• tables and figures: Embed tables and figures within the text after they are first mentioned (or “called out”), or place each table and then each figure on separate pages after the references. If an embedded table or figure appears on the same page as text, place it at either the top or the bottom of the page, and insert a blank double-spaced line to separate the table or figure from the adjacent text.
• footnotes: Use the footnotes function of your word-processing program to insert a footnote at the bottom of the page of text on which the footnote appears, or list footnotes together on a separate page after the references.

Papers such as dissertations and theses may require additional elements not listed here. Follow the institutional or departmental guidelines of your university to order the pages of a dissertation or thesis.

A Review: Key Technologies of Obstacle Perception Based on Panoramic Vision in Low-Altitude Rotorcraft Uavs

22 Pages Posted: 17 Aug 2024

XIAOYAN JIANG

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Abdul Rashid Husain

Qinghai xie.

Jiangsu Ocean University

Khairul Hamimah Abas

University of Technology Malaysia

Recent years, Low-altitude Rotorcraft UAVs(Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) has shown betterprospect in many tasks, such as aerial mapping, research and rescue, plant protection, and soon. In unknown environments, the UAVs will face the risk of collision from variousunknown obstacles. Effective obstacle detection is the base of safe flight. All kinds ofsensors have been used in the tasks of obstacle detection. Thereinto, panoramic visionsystems have a big advantage with the ability of helping the UAVs to perceive and recognizeall kinds of obstacles from any direction. Aiming at the key technologies of obstaclesdetection based on panoramic vision in the UAVs, this paper reviewed the research andapplication situation at home and abroad, and summarized the main bottleneck problems.Based on the work in this paper, we will carry out research in panoramic stitching,all-direction obstacles detection, and so on.

Keywords: Panoramic image, Fisheye camera, Obstacle detection

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia ( email )

Centre for Advanced Composite Materials School of Mechanical Engineering Malaysia

Jiangsu Ocean University ( email )

Khairul hamimah abas (contact author), university of technology malaysia ( email ), do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on ssrn, paper statistics, related ejournals, artificial intelligence ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Robotics eJournal

Industrial & manufacturing engineering ejournal, aerospace engineering ejournal, mechanical engineering ejournal.

Citation Style: APA 6th Edition: Title Page & Abstract

• Avoiding Plagiarism
• APA Style Guides
• Basic Formatting
• Title Page & Abstract
• The Main Body
• The References Page
• Citation Examples
• APA & Microsoft Word
• Citation Generation Tools
• Frequently Asked Questions

The Title Page

Your title page should follow all of the rules outlined in the Basic Formatting tab. In addition, it should be centered in the upper-half of the page. It must include the following information (and your instructor might prefer you to add more):

• The full title of your paper in title case
• Your name (First Last)
• Your institution (Keuka College)

See the example below (click it to view larger version):

View the video tutorial below on how to set up the title page in Microsoft Word 2016:

The Abstract

An abstract is a brief summary of what your paper is all about. Your instructor may or may not require you to include an abstract, so ask them. If they do require an abstract, find out how long they would like it to be. Generally, an abstract is 150 to 250 words long. It is recommended that you write the abstract after you have written your paper. It's a good idea when you're first setting up your document, to include a placeholder page for the abstract on the 2nd page (after the title page).

Your abstract page should follow all of the rules outlined in the  Basic Formatting  tab. Left-align, but do not hit the tab key or indent in any way at the beginning of the abstract. 

See the example below (click it to view larger):

View the video tutorial below on how to set up the abstract page in Microsoft Word 2016:

Reference Librarian

• << Previous: Basic Formatting
• Next: The Main Body >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 3:56 PM
• URL: https://libguides.keuka.edu/apa6