I wrote an editorial in 2012 [BCMJ;54:61 [10]] discussing the use of abbreviations in medical writing, essentially pleading with scientific writers to cease and desist. In the 9 long years since my editorial’s publication, the use of abbreviations has not improved and actually seems to be worsening, which is why I am revisiting this topic. My last editorial was quite cheeky, as I used more and more abbreviations as I went along, which perhaps diminished the message. I will attempt to be much clearer this time.

An abbreviation is a short form of a word or phrase used to represent the whole for convenience or to improve comprehension. The key takeaway is the part about improving comprehension. Our brains readily accept commonly used abbreviations and move seamlessly along without hesitation while reading. When faced with the abbreviation MI, for example, most health care providers automatically register that the individual has suffered a myocardial infarction and are able to carry on reading without having to wonder what it stands for and rescan the article above for a definition. Medicine is full of commonly used and accepted abbreviations such as BMI, bp, DM, TSH, and PE. These are not the problem, as readers’ eyes pass over them easily, with good comprehension.

Not to pick on any particular author, but on perusal of some recently submitted manuscripts, here are some abbreviations I found: NROP, TUG, CHR, RTPCR, LUS, OUD, and PWUD. Perhaps these abbreviations are commonly used by individuals within their respective fields of medicine, but they don’t translate well to a general readership. I’m pretty sure that most of you don’t know what they stand for.

So, what about the whole convenience reason for using abbreviations? This is what pronouns and other nouns are for. Using a pronoun is just as easy as using an abbreviation and is equally succinct. If you are abbreviating picky narrow-minded editor by using PNME, it is much more effective to use the pronoun he.

Please limit the use of abbreviations in your writing. Frequent use of abbreviations turns a good article into a manuscript that reads like fingernails across a chalkboard. Now don’t get me wrong: I appreciate you taking the time to create and submit papers, studies, letters, and so on. I know this process is difficult and requires time, effort, and fortitude. Taking a risk by submitting your written word for others to comment on in a peer review process is a brave venture, and I admire everyone who does it.

I am just asking for the process to proceed more smoothly by not forcing us to continually scan the manuscript looking for the definition of yet another obscure abbreviation. This will improve your article’s chance of being accepted for publication and of reaching its real audience: your colleagues.
—David R. Richardson, MD (PNME)