Lab Wiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace:
abstract

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision 		Previous revision
abstract [2019/11/03 01:20]
floyd 		abstract [2019/11/03 03:38]
floyd
Line 1: Line 1:
 A good abstract is a clear summary of the article. A bad abstract is not clear, overly terse (rare) or overly wordy, or even misleading.  A good abstract is a clear summary of the article. A bad abstract is not clear, overly terse (rare) or overly wordy, or even misleading. 
- 
-A misleading example is "The health effects of a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize [...] were studied 2 years in rats. In females, all treated groups died 2–3 times more than controls, and more rapidly. This difference was visible in 3 male groups fed GMOs. [...] Females developed large mammary tumors almost always more often than and before controls, [...] Males presented 4 times more large palpable tumors than controls which occurred up to 600 days earlier. Biochemistry data confirmed very significant kidney chronic deficiencies; for all treatments and both sexes, 76% of the altered parameters were kidney related. These results can be explained by [...] by the overexpression of the transgene in the GMO and its metabolic consequences." [[seralini_et_al_2012]] 
- 
-The results presented in the paper did not support these statements in the abstract.  
  
 Nature gives detailed guidelines for how to write a well crafted abstract. See their guide for an annotated abstract (https://www.nature.com/nature/for-authors/formatting-guide).  Nature gives detailed guidelines for how to write a well crafted abstract. See their guide for an annotated abstract (https://www.nature.com/nature/for-authors/formatting-guide). 
Line 16: Line 12:
 In essence you start with a broad introduction, then a more focused introduction, focus in on your question and main result, then move back to a broad perspective of the implications of the result, and then an even broader perspective.  In essence you start with a broad introduction, then a more focused introduction, focus in on your question and main result, then move back to a broad perspective of the implications of the result, and then an even broader perspective. 
  
 +A misleading example is "The health effects of a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize [...] were studied 2 years in rats. In females, all treated groups died 2–3 times more than controls, and more rapidly. This difference was visible in 3 male groups fed GMOs. [...] Females developed large mammary tumors almost always more often than and before controls, [...] Males presented 4 times more large palpable tumors than controls which occurred up to 600 days earlier. Biochemistry data confirmed very significant kidney chronic deficiencies; for all treatments and both sexes, 76% of the altered parameters were kidney related. These results can be explained by [...] by the overexpression of the transgene in the GMO and its metabolic consequences." [[seralini_et_al_2012|Séralini et al. 2012]]
 +
 +The results presented in the paper did not support these statements in the abstract. 
abstract.txt · Last modified: 2019/11/03 03:38 by floyd

Page Tools

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki