Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT06525805

Readers' Attention of Shorter Versus Longer Abstracts of Systematic Reviews

The present randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to investigate the perceptions of researchers on systematic review (SR) abstracts. The primary objective will be to compare readers' attention of shorter versus longer abstracts. The secondary objective will be to assess the perception of an abstract based on four indicators of a well-written abstract: (a) Informativeness, (b) Accuracy, (c) Attractiveness, and (d) Conciseness.

The study will involve researchers from all over the world who recently published an SR, regardless of their research field. To identify eligible authors, a search of MEDLINE (via PubMed) was conducted on May 5, 2024, for systematic reviews published between January 1, 2024, and March 26, 2024. A total of at least 6200 SRs will be selected from PubMed and assessed for eligibility. The corresponding author information will be extracted from all included SRs and randomized in a 1:1 ratio.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Researchers Attention

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg

Oldenburg, Germany

About this study

This study will attempt to emulate the reading process observed in PubMed. When searching PubMed, researchers are initially presented with an overview of the references identified. After clicking on the title, the corresponding abstract appears. For full-text access, researchers must actively follow a separate link to the journal page.

In this RCT, participants will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to two groups (those receiving a long abstract vs. those receiving a short abstract). Both groups receive the same cover letter by e-mail explaining the purpose of the study, the use of the data, measures to ensure anonymity of participation, and a link for participation.

The link will direct participants to SoSci Survey, an online survey tool. Those in the group receiving the long abstract will see an abstract with a length of 771 words (PMID: 37955353). Those in the group receiving the short abstract will see an abstract with a length of 277 words (PMID: 37942649). Both abstracts are structured and pertain to the same review entitled "Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs. retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones". This review was published once in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and once in the journal BJU International.

The design of the abstract presented is similar to that of PubMed, but no title or authors will be indicated. After reading the abstract, participants must actively click the "Continue" button to proceed with the survey.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

The corresponding authors of systematic reviews that were indexed in PubMed between January 1, 2024, and March 26, 2024, and for which an English abstract is available will be included. These include authors of all types of SR, with the majority likely representing SRs on effectiveness. Authors of other types of evidence syntheses (e.g. scoping reviews, methodological papers), editorials, protocols, corrections, retractions, erratums, or summaries of SRs will be excluded.

For identifying the systematic reviews from which the corresponding authors will be contacted we will use the following eligibility criteria.

Inclusion criteria

  • Systematic reviews of all types

Exclusion criteria

  • No English abstract
  • Other types of evidence syntheses (e.g. scoping reviews, methodological papers)
  • Protocols
  • Editorials
  • Others: e.g. Corrections, retractions, erratums, or summaries of SRs
  • No email address available

Treatment and study plan

Long Abstract

Other

The intervention and control group will be provided with a structured abstract of the review by Soderberg et al., entitled "Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs. retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones". This review was published once in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and once in the journal BJU International. The length of the abstract differs significantly depending on the journal.

The participants assigned to this study arm will be presented with the longer version published in the Cochrane Database, comprising 771 words (PMID: 37955353).

Short Abstract

Other

The participants assigned to this study arm will be presented with the shorter version published in BJU International, comprising 277 words (PMID: 37942649).

Primary outcomes

  1. Trial participation

    Time frame: Immediately after reading the abstract

    The primary outcome of this RCT will be the trial participation, which is defined as the proportion of participants who read the abstract and then clicked on the "Continue" button. This will be quantified by dividing the number of participants who read the abstract and proceeded to complete the survey by the total number of individuals who clicked on the link in the email. Information will be electronically captured in SoSci survey.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Indicators of a well-written abstract

    Time frame: Immediately after reading the abstract

    The secondary outcomes will be four indicators of a well-written abstract, as follows:

    • Informativeness
    • Accuracy
    • Attractiveness
    • Conciseness.

    The extent to which participants perceive these criteria to be fulfilled will be quantified on a 4-point Likert scale, e.g. very little informative, little informative, informative, very informative. For data analysis, the data will be dichotomized. For instance, the statements "very little informative" and "little informative" will be summarized in the category "non-informative," while the statements "informative" and "very informative" will be summarized in the category "informative."

Other outcomes

  1. Time needed to read the abstract

    Time frame: Immediately after reading the abstract

    The time needed to read the abstract will be quantified. The time interval is defined as the period between the participant clicking on the link in the email and clicking on the "Continue" button to proceed to the survey. This time will be automatically recorded by SoSci Survey.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of Oldenburg

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Readers' Attention of Shorter Versus Longer Abstracts of Systematic Reviews: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Important dates

Study start
2024
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2024
First posted
Jul 29, 2024
Registry last updated
Nov 8, 2024

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.