Authors submitting manuscripts reporting the results of clinical investigations should prepare an abstract of no more than 250 words under the folloiwng headings: “Objective,” “Design,” “Setting,” “Patients” (or “Participants”), “Intervention” (if any), “Main Outcome Measure(s),” “Main Results,” and “Conclusions.”

Objective: The abstract should begin with a clear statement of the precise objective or question addressed in the report. If more than one objective is addressed, the main objective should be indicated and only key secondary objectives stated. If a priori hypothesis was tested, it should be stated.

Design: The basic design of the study should be described. The duration of follow-up, if any, should be stated. See orgininal article for greater information.

Setting: To assist the reader to determine the application of the report to their own clijnical circumstances the study setting(s) should be described. Of particular importance is whether the setting is the general community, a primary care or referral center, private or institutional practice or ambulatory or hospitalized care.

Patients or Other Participants: The clinical disorders, important elegibility criteria and key sociodemographic features of patients should be stated. The numbers of participants and how they were selected should be provided, including the number of otherwise eligible subjects who were approached but refused. See orgininal article for greater information.

Main Outcome Measure(s): The primary study outcome measurement(s) should be indicated as planned before data collection began or if the paper does not emphasize the main planned outcomes of a study as well as if the hypothesis was formulated after the collection of the data.

Results: The main results of the study should be given. Measurements that require explanation for the expected audience of the article should be definced. Important measurements not included in the presentation of results should be declared. See orgininal article for greater information.

Conclusion(s): Only those conclusions of the study that are directly supported by the evidence reported should be given, along with their clincal application (avoiding speculation and over-generalization) and an indication whether additional study is required beofre the information should be used in a usual clinical settings. See orgininal article for greater information.

Lawrence DJ, Structured abstracts and JMPT , Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics 1992;15:77-82.

See following sample abstract

Sample Structured Abstract for Articles Reporting Original Data from Clinical Investigations with Human Subject(s)


Walsh MJ, Polus BI. The frequency of positive common spinal clinical examination findings in a sample of premenstrual syndrome sufferers. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1999 May;22(4):216-20.

OBJECTIVE: As part of a randomized clinical trial to determine the efficacy of chiropractic therapy on premenstrual syndrome (PMS), subjects were evaluated for initial underlying spinal dysfunction. SUBJECTS: Fifty-four subjects with diagnosed PMS (using a Moos PMS questionnaire plus daily symptom monitoring) and 30 subjects with no diagnosable PMS were recruited by newspaper advertising and referrals. DESIGN: All subjects underwent a full history and physical and chiropractic examination carried out by 1 of 2 fully qualified and registered chiropractors, each with a minimum of 10 years experience. The results of the assessment for the PMS group were compared with those of the non-PMS group. SETTING: RMIT teaching clinics. DATA ANALYSIS: The data collected were entered into a spread sheet and contingency tables were created. The data were analyzed by use of chi-squared tests, with the statistical significance being set at P < .05. RESULTS: The PMS group had a higher percentage of positive responses for each of 12 measured spinal dysfunction indexes except for range of motion of the low back. The indexes where the increase was statistically significant (P < .05) were cervical, thoracic, and low back tenderness, low back orthopedic testing, low back muscle weakness, and the neck disability index. An average of 5.4 of the 12 indexes were positive for the PMS group compared with 3.0 for the non-PMS group. CONCLUSIONS: A relatively high incidence of spinal dysfunction exists in PMS sufferers compared with a comparable group of non-PMS sufferers. This is suggestive that spinal dysfunction could be a causative factor in PMS and that chiropractic manipulative therapy may offer an alternative therapeutic approach for PMS sufferers.


MeSh Terms: MeSH Terms: Adolescent, Adult, Back Pain, Female, Human, Manipulation, Spinal, Middle Age, Physical Examination, Premenstrual Syndrome/rehabilitation, Premenstrual Syndrome/physiopathology. Questionnaires, Range of Motion, Articular, Spinal Diseases/physiopathology, Spinal Diseases/diagnosis, Spine/physiopathology, Support, Non-U.S. Gov't