Researchers AttentionNCT06525805
Readers' Attention of Shorter Versus Longer Abstracts of Systematic Reviews
A study testing Long Abstract and Short Abstract in people with Researchers Attention, run by University of Oldenburg at 1 site in Germany.
Trial summary
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. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Researchers Attention
- What is being tested?
- Long Abstract and Short Abstract
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 1,941 participants
- Where
- 1 siteGermany
- Study dates
- 1 Aug 2024to 30 Sep 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Systematic reviews of all types
Who cannot join
- 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
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Readers' Attention of Shorter Versus Longer Abstracts of Systematic Reviews: A Randomized Controlled Trial
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.
Read the detailed description
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.
- Conditions
- Researchers Attention
- Being tested
- Long Abstract, Short Abstract
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Long AbstractOther
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 AbstractOther
The participants assigned to this study arm will be presented with the shorter version published in BJU International, comprising 277 words (PMID: 37942649).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Long Abstract | Experimental | Abstract length: 771 words Receives: Other: Long Abstract |
| Short Abstract | Active comparator | Abstract length: 277 words Receives: Other: Short Abstract |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Trial participation
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.
Measured: Immediately after reading the abstract
Secondary outcomes (1)
Indicators of a well-written 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."
Measured: Immediately after reading the abstract
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted29 Jul 2024
- Study start1 Aug 2024
- Primary completion30 Sep 2024
- Study completion30 Sep 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Researchers AttentionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This will be a two-arm, single-blinded, superiority, parallel-group randomized controlled trial (RCT) with 1:1 allocation of intervention and control groups.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 1,941 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Oldenburg
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Jasmin Helbach, University of Oldenburg
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06525805
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- UO_Abstracts_2024
- Status last verified
- Nov 2024
- First submitted
- 18 Jul 2024
- Last updated
- 8 Nov 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Bahadoran Z, Mirmiran P, Kashfi K, Ghasemi A. The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Abstract and Keywords. Int J Endocrinol Metab. 2020 Jan 28;18(1):e100159. doi: 10.5812/ijem.100159. eCollection 2020 Jan.
PubMed 32308700Munn Z, Stern C, Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Jordan Z. What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Jan 10;18(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4.
PubMed 29316881Soderberg L, Ergun O, Ding M, Parker R, Borofsky MS, Pais V, Dahm P. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Nov 13;11(11):CD013445. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013445.pub2.
PubMed 37955353Soderberg L, Ergun O, Ding M, Parker R, Borofsky M, Pais V, Dahm P. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones: a Cochrane Review. BJU Int. 2024 Feb;133(2):132-140. doi: 10.1111/bju.16220. Epub 2023 Nov 29.
PubMed 37942649Helbach J, Wandscher K, Pieper D, Hoffmann F. Readers' attention to shorter versus longer abstracts of systematic reviews: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2026 May 21;31(3):170-177. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2024-113613.
PubMed 41106849
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Nov 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Readers' Attention of Shorter Versus Longer Abstracts of Systematic Reviews: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06525805
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- UO_Abstracts_2024
- Conditions
- Researchers Attention
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 1,941 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of OldenburgUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Sep 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Sep 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 29 Jul 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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.
Detailed description
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.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This will be a two-arm, single-blinded, superiority, parallel-group randomized controlled trial (RCT) with 1:1 allocation of intervention and control groups.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Long Abstract | Experimental | Other: Long AbstractAbstract length: 771 words |
| Short Abstract | Active comparator | Other: Short AbstractAbstract length: 277 words |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Systematic reviews of all types
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- 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
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Long AbstractThe 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). | Other | Long Abstract |
| Short AbstractThe participants assigned to this study arm will be presented with the shorter version published in BJU International, comprising 277 words (PMID: 37942649). | Other | Short Abstract |
Primary outcome
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.
1 secondary outcome
Indicators of a well-written abstract
Time frame: Immediately after reading the abstract
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Nov 2024.
- Background: PubMed 32308700Bahadoran Z, Mirmiran P, Kashfi K, Ghasemi A. The Principles of Biomedical Scientific Writing: Abstract and Keywords. Int J Endocrinol Metab. 2020 Jan 28;18(1):e100159. doi: 10.5812/ijem.100159. eCollection 2020 Jan.
- Background: PubMed 29316881Munn Z, Stern C, Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Jordan Z. What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Jan 10;18(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4.
- Background: PubMed 37955353Soderberg L, Ergun O, Ding M, Parker R, Borofsky MS, Pais V, Dahm P. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Nov 13;11(11):CD013445. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013445.pub2.
- Background: PubMed 37942649Soderberg L, Ergun O, Ding M, Parker R, Borofsky M, Pais V, Dahm P. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stones: a Cochrane Review. BJU Int. 2024 Feb;133(2):132-140. doi: 10.1111/bju.16220. Epub 2023 Nov 29.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 41106849Helbach J, Wandscher K, Pieper D, Hoffmann F. Readers' attention to shorter versus longer abstracts of systematic reviews: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2026 May 21;31(3):170-177. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2024-113613.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Researchers Attention
RecruitingPhase 4
Evaluation of Foquest in Adults 65 Years and Older With ADHD
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Recruiting
Pragmatic Randomised Trial of High Or Standard PHosphAte Targets in End-stage Kidney Disease (PHOSPHATE)
Kidney Failure, Chronic, Hyperphosphatemia
RecruitingPhase 4
An Open-Label Treatment With Randomization Observation, Investigator-Initiated Study, on the Duration and Efficacy of Jornay PM (Methylphenidate Hydrochloride Extended-Release Capsules) on Adult ADHD Symptoms and Executive Function and Emotional Regulation Throughout the Day Into Early Evening
Attention-deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Long Abstract and Short Abstract in people with Researchers Attention, run by University of Oldenburg at 1 site in Germany.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Nov 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Germany. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Trial participation (time frame: Immediately after reading the abstract). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06525805, which also lists 5 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Nov 2024.