Abstract The title and abstract are the most visible and frequently accessed components of a scientific article, often determining whether a manuscript is read, cited or even considered for peer review. Alongside title and abstract, the inclusion of well-chosen keywords significantly enhances searchability and visibility in academic databases. A well-crafted title encapsulates the essence of the study, ensuring clarity, conciseness and searchability, while an effective abstract provides a succinct yet comprehensive summary of the research. Despite their critical role in scientific communication, many authors struggle with optimizing these elements. This article reviews best practices in scientific communication, with a practical orientation. We discuss how structured frameworks (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) enhance rigor and visibility. New authors often overlook the importance of journal-readership alignment, targeting appropriate scopes or the “So what?” test for relevance: critical questions all researchers should pose before submission. Despite being grounded in conventional best practices, this work aims to bridge persistent gaps in real-world manuscript preparation. By addressing common pitfalls and integrating examples and models, this article helps researchers improve both the impact and acceptance potential of their manuscripts through more strategic use of titles, keywords and abstracts.
Chandra et al. (Thu,) studied this question.