Title: The title must reflect the abstract’s content. It should provide as much information as possible about the context and the aims of the study. The title should be about 10–12 words long (max. 250 characters are allowed) and should include the scope of the investigation, the study design, and the goal. In general, the title should be a description of what was investigated rather than a statement of the results or conclusions. The abstract’s title should be easy for the reader to understand and should not include jargon or unfamiliar acronyms or abbreviations. The title should not be in capital letters.
Authors: The list of authors should be restricted to those individuals who carried out the study, conceived it, designed it, gathered the data, analysed the numbers, and wrote the abstract. The author who will present the abstract should be listed first. Every listed author should read and approve the abstract before it is submitted. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the research and analysis of data, as well as the writing of the abstract, to take responsibility for the submission, and to qualify as an “author” (as defined by the ICMJE criteria for authorship).
Main text: A good abstract should address the following five questions:
1. “Why did you start?” – Introduction or background: It should summarise, preferably in one sentence, the current knowledge, or state-of-the-art, specifically in relation to the work.
2. “What did you try to do?” – Aims and objectives: State the aim of the study, and ideally include a short statement of the study’s hypothesis. A legitimate scientific study is not done “to prove that something is true” but rather “to find out whether it is true.” While the distinction may seem small, it has a significant impact. A formal hypothesis demonstrates objectivity.
3. “What did you do?” – Methods: Within an abstract, the description of the method should be brief, and much of the details about the procedure must be omitted. However, in a few short sentences, the reader should have a good idea of the design of the study, the context in which it was done, and the types of patients or measurements that were included.
4. “What did you find?” – Results: It is important to give the main results of the study, not in subjective terms (“We found device X to be superior to device Y”) but also in the form of some real data. The findings must include the most important data in the study and the findings on which the conclusions will be based. Do not include a table or figure unless it is essential for demonstrating your results.
5. “What does it mean?” – Conclusions: Space limitations generally limit authors to a single sentence to convey the significance of their findings and potential implications. Include conclusions that are reasonable and backed by the study’s findings. If the study was restricted to certain patients, a particular therapy, or a specific device, the results may not extend beyond these restrictions.