Abstract and conclusion are useful for quickly determining what the authors want the takeaway to be, so they're better than journalism which can misconstrue eve

Abstract and conclusion are useful for quickly determining what the authors want the takeaway to be, so they're better than journalism which can misconstrue even that. But the problem with reading just the abstract and conclusion is that you don't learn the methods the scientists used. Lots of science is junk due to bad methodology. Of course laypersons are not likely able to determine that even if they read the whole thing, which leaves me to conclude that you should never modify your world view in response to a scientific publication until many credible sources all say the same thing.