{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020517395182872437, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003568242640499554, 'mean_word_length': 4.968085106382978, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Do structured abstracts take more space? And does it matter?

BACKGROUND: Some journal editors object to implementing structured abstracts because, they say, they take up more space than traditional ones. AIM: The aim of this paper is to present evidence to show that in many cases such extra space is unlikely to affect the overall pagination of a journal. METHOD: The lengths of abstracts were examined for 10 or more articles in each of 15 journals with different page-sizes, and adjusted to see whether or not increasing the traditional or decreasing the structured abstracts would change the overall pagination of the journals. RESULTS: There was no indication that using structured abstracts would affect the pagination of journals with large or medium page-sizes, even when new articles began on the next immediate page. However, structured abstracts would cause problems when new articles follow directly on from each other rather than start on a new page. CONCLUSIONS: Structured abstracts take up more space but, by and large, this does not matter. Other suggestions for saving space in journals are considered.