Dear HIFA colleagues,
In a message yesterday I noted the example of a South African physician who altered their perinatal HIV prevention program from an effective therapy to one with lesser efficacy, on the basis of an abstract, as they did not have access to the full text.
Barbour V, Chinnock P, Cohen B, Yamey G. The impact of open access upon public health. Bull World Health Organ. 2006 May;84(5):339. doi: 10.2471/blt.06.032409. Epub 2006 May 17. PMID: 16710533; PMCID: PMC2627358.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2627358/pdf/16710533.pdf
I'm curious to know more about the use of abstracts to guide clinical (and policy) decision-making.
A google search identified a BMJ correspondence (2009) from a physician in the Philippines asks: Can journal abstracts alone be used for clinical decision making?
He notes: 'We recently asked some physicians practicing mostly in developing countries whether Medline abstracts are adequate for clinical decisions: 28% (15/54) categorically stated they are. Forty three percent (23/54) said no, but that they had no access to full-text journals and another 28% also said no, but they had no time to read full-text articles. One respondent did not use Medline abstracts at all. This preliminary study confirms access issues in these countries, but also the potential value for abstracts if these could be made available easily through their existing infrastructure.'
The authors didn't acknowledge the wider limitations of using single research papers to inform decisions.
'If journal abstracts are accepted as ‘current evidence’ suitable for evidence-based practice, then all who are involved in the publication process -- authors, journal reviewers and editors, need to ensure that the abstract is indeed an accurate summary of the full paper.'
Yes. I have previously noted on HIFA my perception that the abstracts in some subscription journals are less informative than those in open-access journals. Sometimes the former appear to be more of a 'teaser' than an informative summary. For example, we sometimes read something like the following in an abstract "Our findings have important implications" without describing what thiose findings or implications are.
Best wishes, Neil
HIFA profile: Neil Pakenham-Walsh is coordinator of HIFA (Healthcare Information For All), a global health community that brings all stakeholders together around the shared goal of universal access to reliable healthcare information. HIFA has 20,000 members in 180 countries, interacting in four languages and representing all parts of the global evidence ecosystem. HIFA is administered by Global Healthcare Information Network, a UK-based nonprofit in official relations with the World Health Organization. Email: neil@hifa.org