Typical errors in scholarly article titles: analysis and correction tactics

Abstract

This article presents the results of a retrospective qualitative analysis of scientific article titles published in the journal General Reanimatology, aiming to identify and prevent typical discrepancies with the scientific and methodological recommendations for the titles formulation. Typical discrepancies include excessive length, suboptimal positioning of key terms, substitution of the research objective with descriptions of routine procedures, exaggeration or misrepresentation of the study’s scope, structural mimicry of previously published titles, use of colloquial or popular-science language, and stylistically inappropriate promotional elements. These flaws can negatively impact the perception and citation of scientific material. The cases report examines the cause-and-effect relationships between flaws in title wording and the potential of the article underestimation by expert’s and bibliometric analysis. Ways for improving the titles formulation included the principles of KISS (Keep It Short & Simple) and Less is More. Their use restores the accuracy of the title’s correspondence to the scope of the study and increases the scientific recognition of the publication. The results can be used by authors in preparing articles for biomedical journals; by reviewers and editors in internal review of manuscripts and the development of editorial standards for scientific biomedical journals; and in teaching academic writing.