You're supposed to read academic papers from start to finish.
Reading start to finish is only worth it if you're interested in the gory details, I'm usually not.
Given the variety of responses here, I wonder if some of this is domain specific.
I was reading mostly neuroscience papers when I was taught this method as an undergrad (though the details are a bit fuzzy these days).
I’d bet it also varies quite a bit with expertise/familiarity with the material. A newcomer will have a hard time understanding the methodology of a niche paper in neuroscience, for example, but the concepts communicated in the abstract and other summary sections are quite valuable.
I would not say it should be read start to finish, I often had to read over parts multiple times to understand it.