There's a reason abstracts exist, and they usually provide enough information as to whether the paper discovered any significant findings, so whether it's worth reading at all.
If you are #1, #2 and in #2 you include reading not just the paper but the meta-analysis papers of the field, that already puts you ahead of 95% of the general public.
Not even scientists themselves are full #3 people. It's just impossible, considering the amount of work that exists in the field, and considering that most studies just confirm existing findings from 10-20-50 years ago.
There's a reason abstracts exist, and they usually provide enough information as to whether the paper discovered any significant findings, so whether it's worth reading at all.
If you are #1, #2 and in #2 you include reading not just the paper but the meta-analysis papers of the field, that already puts you ahead of 95% of the general public.
Not even scientists themselves are full #3 people. It's just impossible, considering the amount of work that exists in the field, and considering that most studies just confirm existing findings from 10-20-50 years ago.