Broadly, an abstract is a short overview (usually 200-250 words) of a project you have undertaken. The project could have been research, audit or a literature review.

An abstract gives the reader a quick overview of your project and lets them decide if the topic of your research matches their interests. It will usually be the first thing they read about your work, so it is important to get it right to capture their interest. You will be invited to submit abstracts to conferences to allow the conference organizers to decide if the topic of your project is relevant to the conference, in which case you may be invited to present your findings as a poster or an oral presentation. You will also include abstracts as part of manuscripts when you submit your work to journals.

This short guide aims to serve as a practical introduction to producing a concise and effective abstract which serves to best communicate the findings of your project to the reader.

The key to writing an abstract (or anything in academia!) is structure. Imagine if you had to read a block of text with seemingly no head or tail – it would be pretty irritating! Structuring your abstract not only makes it easy for you to write it, but also makes it easy for the reader to follow the ‘story’ in a logical way. Most abstracts are structured under the following headings:

Background/Introduction
This gives the reader a starting point. It does not have to be very detailed, but it does needs to get the salient points across. Because you have a word limit, it is best to only include information that is relevant to the aim, method, results or conclusions. You may also need to tailor this section to the ‘level’ that you expect the audience to have: e.g. if you are submitting an abstract about genetic Parkinson’s disease to a movement disorders conference, you might start with “The D231Q mutation in the PARK1 gene produces...” Whereas if you were submitting the same abstract to a general scientific or student conference, you could begin with “Parkinson’s disease can be genetic, most commonly with the following mutations...”

Aim/Objective
This is arguably the most important part of the abstract – if your aim is not clear, the reader will not be able to decide from the methods section if your methodology is appropriate, or from the results section if your project has been successful in meeting its aims.

The aim must be short, relevant, specific and measurable. To continue with the example from above, the aim for the study could have been “To investigate if this genotype of inherited Parkinson’s disease is more responsive to levodopa than....”

Methods
This section is variable as some projects have methods that can only be described well in detail, whereas others can be described succinctly. Think about the need to include certain details in this section – will knowing the details affect the conclusions that the reader draws from the study? For example, it may not be important to include the exact make and model of a hip prosthesis when comparing surgical vs. medical management of osteoarthritis, but it will be important if you are comparing outcomes from two different manufacturers!

Identify your outcome measures in this section. How will you measure what you set out to measure in your aim/objective section? Which parameters will you compare between groups? To continue with the hip prostheses of different makes example from above, your main outcome measure might be the rate of infection for each make. There may be other (secondary) outcome measures such as length of stay in hospital and activity scale ratings, but you do not need to include them in the abstract if you are limited by word count.

It may be a good idea to include what demographic information you collected such as age and gender. Other demographics depend on the kind of study; for example cardiovascular studies often include ethnicity, psychiatry studies may include level of education and so on.

Also, it is generally a good idea to include a sentence about how the data were analysed, including important statistical methods such as the use of t-tests or ANOVAs. If you have the space, you could include details about how you eliminated bias or minimized their effects. Details about data processing are usually of no significance.

Results
This section can be kept brief by simply including the mean values of the outcome measures between the groups that are being compared, and the relevant p-values. In order to keep things brief, it is usually not necessary to include the test statistic (for example the ‘t’ or ‘F’ value) in comparison studies. However in correlation studies, statistics such as the ‘r’ value are usually included in the results section along with the p-value.

For qualitative studies, you could include in this section the dominant themes emerging from your research.

Conclusions
This section is sometimes combined with the ‘Results’ section. It is the broad impression that you have established from your results. Essentially, it is one or two sentences about the main finding from your research in relation to your aim/objective. It is a good idea to relate it back to your aim by using the exact (or almost exact) words that you used previously in order to make it very clear to the reader what your final conclusion is.

If your conclusions imply that some sort a change is necessary, such as a change in clinical practice or a new avenue of research to pursue, this implication is also included in the conclusions section and often comprises the final sentence.

It is not a good idea to include any specific numbers or values in this section, nor any new data, as that is what the results section is for!

Key Points

• Use headings!
• Think about your audience before you write your abstract
• Make your aim as clear and specific as possible
• Put yourself in the reader’s shoes and think what would make it easier for the reader to understand what your project was all about.
• Think about terminology and abbreviations – is there a way you could replace difficult or niche words with easily comprehensible ones? Have you explained what each abbreviation means the first time it is used?
• If in doubt as to whether to include particular information, ask yourself if including that information will change how others understand your project.
• Ensure that your conclusions match your aims – use similar words and phrases and do not exaggerate the scope of your conclusions.
• Keep to the word limit!
• Get a friend or a senior colleague to critique your abstract.

Introduction
Oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) trainees in the UK have traditionally completed their dental undergraduate studies prior to returning to medical school. Recently, there have been increasing numbers of medical graduates who return to dental school before embarking on OMFS specialist training. There is limited research into the career motivation within this group and little guidance on how they may integrate the dental undergraduate course into their postgraduate training path. This study aims to evaluate these factors in more detail.

Methods
Questionnaires and focus groups were used to evaluate prior surgical experience of qualified medics who return to dental school with the intention of pursuing a career in OMFS, along with the factors that affect the timing of their return to dental school.

Results
The average age of medical graduates entering dental school decreased during the study period. The average number of months each cohort of students spent as a practicing doctor prior to starting dentistry also reduced. Postgraduate experience in OMFS was highly variable, but the numbers of students who received alternative exposure to OMFS, such as undergraduate special study modules, medical school elective or taster weeks, increased. The key barriers that were carefully considered by these trainees before returning to university included the perceived increase in the length of training, trainees' prior surgical experience, financial implications and the impact on quality of life.

Conclusions
A trainee's decision to return to study dentistry is a multifactorial process. Understanding when trainees decide to return to sit their dental degree is vital not only to provide guidance for future trainees but also to assist future workforce planning, thus aiding training, education and development within OMFS.  See the NCBI website 

It has been suggested that oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) is better established in dental schools than in medical schools, and as a result, dental students have a greater insight into the scope of the specialty. We explore how much time is allocated to OMFS in the undergraduate curriculum in medical schools in the UK, and the students' perceptions of the specialty. A total of 186 final year students from 5 medical schools were recruited in a questionnaire-based survey. Of them, 141 (76%) reported no exposure to OMFS, and 37 of the 45 students (82%) who had had some exposure reported that it was not part of their timetabled curriculum. The 2 aspects considered most important by students were the long training pathway (n=38, 20%) and the requirement for dual qualification (n=33, 18%). Our results suggest that UK medical schools provide limited exposure to OMFS. We think it is important that the specialty is included in the compulsory undergraduate curriculum to ensure that medical students gain some awareness. This will not only allow junior doctors to make better informed decisions about their chosen careers, but may also help to reduce the number of inappropriate referrals from doctors in other specialties.  See the NCBI website

Introduction
Although traditionally a "dentistry first, medicine second" training route, UK Oral and Maxillofacial surgery is increasingly populated with medicine-first trainees at ST3 level. Despite this, there is little evidence suggesting any increase in exposure at medical undergraduate level. We sought to evaluate the current level of awareness of OMFS as a medical specialty and potential career pathway amongst 'first-degree' medical undergraduates.

Methods
We distributed an on-line survey amongst 253 medical undergraduates divided between two UK universities.

Results
A total of 72.3% of undergraduates received no exposure to OMFS in any form. Those with exposure had an improved understanding of the scope of the specialty. Regardless of previous exposure to the specialty, only 27.7% correctly identified the essential requirements for entry in OMFS specialty training. Nevertheless, a vast majority (76.7%) wanted more guidance on the possibility of pursuing a career in OMFS.

Conclusions
Undergraduate exposure to OMFS in UK medical schools is limited. Even a small degree of exposure to OMFS improves understanding of the scope of the specialty. Although medical students do not fully understand the career pathway, they wish to explore OMFS as a career option. It is therefore important that UK undergraduate surgical curricula offer greater exposure to the specialty, the career pathway and the clinical opportunities it can provide.  See the NCBI website

Maxillofacial surgery (or to give the speciality its full title oral and maxillofacial surgery) has long had a veil of mystery associated with it. Maxillofacial surgical trainees were seen as a rare breed of people who did a dental degree followed by a medical degree before embarking on their surgical training. However, changes have been afoot for several years and there are now increasing numbers of people in the speciality whose primary qualification is medicine with a secondary degree in dentistry.  See the NCBI website

A questionnaire was sent to the 112 dental graduates who were doing a second degree in medicine in the United Kingdom (UK) in the academic year 2002-2003. Seventy-four students replied. The most common time from graduating from dental school to returning to medical school was 36 months. Of the 74 respondents 50 (68%) wrote that they intended to return to oral and maxillofacial surgery.  See the NCBI website

Oral and maxillofacial surgery has the longest training pathway of any medical specialty in the UK. Peter Brennan and colleagues look at ways to shorten this.

Introduction
There is a perception that the training pathway for oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) is unduly long and arduous, as consultant oral and maxillofacial surgeons must be doubly qualified (that is, hold degrees in medicine and dentistry) and be holders of two higher fellowships.

Methods
We reviewed the data regarding the average age of National Training Number (NTN) holders and GMC data on the year of first registration and the year of entry onto a specialist surgical list for all 9 surgical specialties.

Results
The results showed the average age of the surgical SpR populations ranged from 33.5 to 38.2 years with an average age of 36.14 years. OMFS SpR's average age is 37.69 years. The GMC data showed the average number of months from full to specialist registration ranged from 90.83 months to 135.24 months, with OMFS surgeons having the lowest average.

Conclusions
These data suggest that OMFS surgeons are of a similar age to other surgeons whilst in training. In addition, they have the shortest transit time between full GMC registration and entry onto the specialist list. The length of this training even with dual qualification is similar to other surgical specialties.  See the NCBI website

Becoming an oral and maxillofacial surgeon is challenging, but, as Rory O’Connor and colleagues explain, it is not as tough as many think, and, with an expected expansion in training numbers, job prospects are good.

Doctors need two degrees to become oral and maxillofacial surgeons, which has big implications for the cost of training, say Robert Isaac and colleagues.