Mentors Feedback on abstract writing

1. Yes, the tack chosen to this specific abstract is correctly?

2. Yes, the title does reflect on the content of the abstract, but I would work further on the abstract so that it can eliminate acronyms, such as JLHIV and instead add the full sentence as “Journalists Living with HIV/AIDS” (JLHIV)

3. Somewhat. I recommend that further exploration be made on the gaps and success of the project. At the same time the next steps need a lot of revision. I would look at the analysis and assessment of the project and how these recommendation from the qualitative work will be used to increase to end HIV/AIDS based stigma and discrimination.

4. The abstract has wonderful ideas but further work needs to be looked at allowing for the ideas and methodology of the abstract can have coherence. I’d start out by looking at the further policy formulation and impact findings that came out of the project.

5. No, each section does not provide relevant information. Specifically section “NEXT STEPS”. There’s know indication of how the project will be used, how finding from the project will be used to strengthen advocacy and project barriers.

Language, Grammar:

1. Yes, correct terminology is used within the abstract. I would really be careful using acronyms. Acronyms are wonderful but should not be used as a stand still.

2. Further work and attention should be used to assist in spelling. My recommendation is to go over spelling with a colleague, which may assist in catching any spelling errors which exist.

3. Yes, the language is concise and clear.

4. The abstract is well-written and easy to follow. I would only recommend that further work be made on section next steps.

Scientific Design: Background:

1. I find there the abstract show weak objectives, which leaves the me wondering what the objective of the project was, its impact and how the finding will be used.

2. Yes, the research design is sound but needs further work. The only thing shown with the abstract are the questions from submitter.

Materials and Methods:

1. Yes, the methodology used within the study is appropriate.

2. I don’t believe that explanation was provided on the reason as to why the author used the method and its purpose. The abstract does indicate the type of methods used and how, but not as to why this specific method was selected.

3. Yes, the data analysis and interpretation is appropriate. I’d clarify further on findings from the data analysis as case examples.

Results/Conclusions:

1. There is failure to provide an appropriate conclusion and explanation to the conclusion.

2. The study touch on a issues and dimensions which allow of reduction of stigma and lessons learnt. The project lack policy innovation. If changes were made and further information was provided as indicated above in many of the recommendations I believe that new innovation findings could be identified.

3. Yes, the abstract does provide new insights.

4. No, the results are not analyzed in a broader context. Further work needs to be made which provide results in the abstract derived from the findings made.

5. Yes, the future implications of the study are discussed. However, there is a lack on the type of policy changes and/or interventions need to be assessed and implemented to look at those future implications.