As the number of new professional articles one must read each month increases by leaps and bounds much attention is presumably being given to making them more efficiently accessible to the reading public. Although digests, reviews, and collected abstracts play their important parts, a major accusation must still be leveled at us, the writing medical public. An intelligent, comprehensive, and succinct summary at the end of an article is all too unusual. Perhaps we are derelict in this regard because, blinded by an author's vanity, we assume that the reader will be so entranced by our style and lucidity that he will read the whole article word for word and a summary will be unnecessary. We then insert one merely as a genuflection to custom with little attention to its content.
Let us be undeceived! Gone are the days when doctors are expected to read papers written in the style
Warren R. In Summary. Arch Surg. 1963;87(2):194-195. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1963.01310140002002