| Home | KCSE | Sitemap | Contact Us |  
Science Editing > Volume 8(1); 2021 > Article
Science Editing 2021;8(1): 39-46. doi: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.228
Comparison of length limits and the actual length of abstracts in pharmacology, oncology, and neurology journals listed in PubMed
Eungi Kim , Yong-Gu Lee
Department of Library and Information Science, Keimyung University, Daegu, Korea
Corresponding Author: Yong-Gu Lee, Email: yonggulee@kmu.ac.kr
Received: November 17, 2020;  Accepted: January 22, 2021.
This study aimed to compare the length limits specified in the author guidelines with the actual length of abstracts in 90 journals in the fields of pharmacology, oncology, and neurology. Specifically, the following parameters were examined: abstract formats among the three subject areas; the relationship between the length limit and the actual length of abstracts; and actual abstract length according to the number of subheadings, the length of structured abstract subheadings, the length of frequently used subheading sets, and clinical trial registration information.
Thirty journals from each of three medical fields (pharmacology, oncology, and neurology) were selected from Elsevier’s Scimago Journal Rank. This included the journals indexed in PubMed from 2018 to 2019 that published the most articles. Article abstracts from these journals were used to create a dataset for this study. Descriptive, comparative, and correlational analyses of data for the three fields were conducted.
The number of subheadings and abstract length increased in parallel. The Results component was the longest, suggesting that authors tended to use longer text to report results than for other structural abstract components. Authors generally utilized the length limit to a full extent without exceeding it.
The traditionally used 250-word length limit should be reconsidered for pharmacology, oncology, and neurology journals because it disregards the distinctive characteristics of abstracts and length differences between structured and unstructured abstracts. Various characteristics of abstract lengths presented in this study should be considered to establish more justifiable policies.
Keywords: Bibliometrics; Publications; PubMed
PDF Links  PDF Links
Full text via DOI  Full text via DOI
Download Citation  Download Citation
CrossRef TDM  CrossRef TDM
Editorial Office
The Korea Science & Technology Center 2nd floor,
22 Teheran-ro 7-gil, Gangnam-gu, Seoul 06130, Korea
TEL : +82-2-3420-1390   FAX : +82-2-563-4931   E-mail : kcse@kcse.org
Copyright © Korean Council of Science Editors. All rights reserved.           Developed in M2PI