Publications can avoid frustration from repetition related to the inverted pyramid structure by clearly splitting up the multiple levels of details they provide As you say the inverted pyramid structure can lead to repetition. If this isn't made clear to the reader it can be confusing and frustrating for the reader. One common solution to this is to use a convention that clearly separates the levels of detail. In newspapers a common way of doing this is to first have a headline with the key point, then for the second level, a short summary in a different font, say italics, and finally the full article at the third level. In scientific articles, there is the title and abstract with similar functions. Books can have many levels, with a title, subtitle, summary on the back, foreword, preface and introductory chapter.
Publications can avoid frustration from repetition related to the inverted pyramid structure by clearly splitting up the multiple levels of details they provide As you say the inverted pyramid structure can lead to repetition. If this isn't made clear to the reader it can be confusing and frustrating for the reader. One common solution to this is to use a convention that clearly separates the levels of detail. In newspapers a common way of doing this is to first have a headline with the key point, then for the second level, a short summary in a different font, say italics, and finally the full article at the third level. In scientific articles, there is the title and abstract with similar functions. Books can have many levels, with a title, subtitle, summary on the back, foreword, preface and introductory chapter.