Scientific papers presented at the European Congress of Radiology: a two-year comparison

Research on Research: Publication of Projects Presented at Medical Imaging Research Days Across Canada

OBJECTIVE

Twenty-one previous studies have shown a mean presentation to publication conversion rates at radiology conferences of 26%. There have been no prior studies on publication of medical imaging residency research presentations. Our objective was to determine how many medical imaging resident research projects presented at internal program research days across Canada go on to publication.

METHODS

A list of unique medical imaging resident research presentations given at program research days during the 2012-2013 to 2016-2017 academic years was generated via e-mail contact of programs or review of publicly available data on program websites. Unique resident presentations were identified and publications associated with these presentations were sought via database and Internet searching. The number of publications, publishing journals, and time to publication was determined.

RESULTS

Data from 32 research days at 7 programs were assessed. A total of 287 resident presentations were identified. Of these 287 presentations, 99 had associated publications (34% presentation to publication conversation rate), with variation in presentation numbers and publication conversion rates between schools. These 99 presentations were associated with a total of 118 publications in a total of 57 different journals. Time from presentation to publication was calculable for 109 of the 118 articles. Fifteen (14%) were published before research day and 94 (86%) were published after research day with a mean time to publication of 12.3 ± 13.6 months for all articles.

CONCLUSIONS

Thirty-four percent of resident research presentations at Canadian medical imaging program research days go on to publication.

Abstract to publication rate: Do all the papers presented in conferences see the light of being a full publication?

BACKGROUND

Every year the scientific sessions of Annual National Conference of Indian Psychiatric Society (ANCIPS) are marked by presentation of free papers, posters, and award paper sessions, which are usually meant for presentation of new research which is not yet published. Hence, it is expected that these papers will be published in near future so that the scientific literature is distributed and shared with wider audience.

AIM

This paper aims to evaluate the abstract to publication rate of papers presented during ANCIPS in the years 2012-2014.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this study, all the free papers, posters, and award papers presented during the ANCIPS of 2012-2014 were listed, and electronic searches were carried out to search for published articles. In addition, one of the authors of papers not found in the electronic searches were contacted through E-mail.

RESULTS

A total of 1081 papers were presented during the ANCIPS in the 3 year period under study. Of these, 64 were award papers, 622 were free papers, and 395 were posters. Majority (n = 807; 74.6%) of these could be categorized as research data-based presentations; this was followed by case reports/series (203; 18.8%), review of literature (n = 35; 3.3%), and others (n = 36; 3.3%). Overall, only 27% of the papers were published after at least 5 years of the presentation. Of all the award papers, 69.6% of papers were published, whereas only 26.8% of free oral papers and 22.5% of free posters were published. About half (45.6%) of the papers were published in national journals. In terms of indexing, among those which were published, 62.8% were published in Medline-indexed (PubMed-listed) Journals with a mean impact factor of 1.

CONCLUSION

The present study shows that only 27% of the abstracts presented during the ANCIPS are ultimately published as full text articles in the next 5 years.

Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts

BACKGROUND

Abstracts of presentations at scientific meetings are usually available only in conference proceedings. If subsequent full publication of results reported in these abstracts is based on the magnitude or direction of the results, publication bias may result. Publication bias creates problems for those conducting systematic reviews or relying on the published literature for evidence about health and social care.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review reports of studies that have examined the proportion of meeting abstracts and other summaries that are subsequently published in full, the time between meeting presentation and full publication, and factors associated with full publication.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Science Citation Index, reference lists, and author files. The most recent search was done in February 2016 for this substantial update to our earlier Cochrane Methodology Review (published in 2007).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included reports of methodology research that examined the proportion of biomedical results initially presented as abstracts or in summary form that were subsequently published. Searches for full publications had to be at least two years after meeting presentation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated the proportion of abstracts published in full using a random-effects model. Dichotomous variables were analyzed using risk ratio (RR), with multivariable models taking into account various characteristics of the reports. We assessed time to publication using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Combining data from 425 reports (307,028 abstracts) resulted in an overall full publication proportion of 37.3% (95% confidence interval (CI), 35.3% to 39.3%) with varying lengths of follow-up. This is significantly lower than that found in our 2007 review (44.5%. 95% CI, 43.9% to 45.1%). Using a survival analyses to estimate the proportion of abstracts that would be published in full by 10 years produced proportions of 46.4% for all studies; 68.7% for randomized and controlled trials and 44.9% for other studies. Three hundred and fifty-three reports were at high risk of bias on one or more items, but only 32 reports were considered at high risk of bias overall.Forty-five reports (15,783 abstracts) with 'positive' results (defined as any 'significant' result) showed an association with full publication (RR = 1.31; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.40), as did 'positive' results defined as a result favoring the experimental treatment (RR =1.17; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.28) in 34 reports (8794 abstracts). Results emanating from randomized or controlled trials showed the same pattern for both definitions (RR = 1.21; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.32 (15 reports and 2616 abstracts) and RR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.32 (13 reports and 2307 abstracts), respectively.Other factors associated with full publication include oral presentation (RR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.40 to 1.52; studied in 143 reports with 115,910 abstracts); acceptance for meeting presentation (RR = 1.65; 95% CI 1.48 to 1.85; 22 reports with 22,319 abstracts); randomized trial design (RR = 1.51; 95% CI 1.36 to 1.67; 47 reports with 28,928 abstracts); and basic research (RR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.82; 92 reports with 97,372 abstracts). Abstracts originating at an academic setting were associated with full publication (RR = 1.60; 95% CI 1.34 to 1.92; 34 reports with 16,913 abstracts), as were those considered to be of higher quality (RR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.73; 12 reports with 3364 abstracts), or having high impact (RR = 1.60; 95% CI 1.41 to 1.82; 11 reports with 6982 abstracts). Sensitivity analyses excluding reports that were abstracts themselves or classified as having a high risk of bias did not change these findings in any important way.In considering the reports of the methodology research that we included in this review, we found that reports published in English or from a native English-speaking country found significantly higher proportions of studies published in full, but that there was no association with year of report publication. The findings correspond to a proportion of abstracts published in full of 31.9% for all reports, 40.5% for reports in English, 42.9% for reports from native English-speaking countries, and 52.2% for both these covariates combined.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

More than half of results from abstracts, and almost a third of randomized trial results initially presented as abstracts fail to be published in full and this problem does not appear to be decreasing over time. Publication bias is present in that 'positive' results were more frequently published than 'not positive' results. Reports of methodology research written in English showed that a higher proportion of abstracts had been published in full, as did those from native English-speaking countries, suggesting that studies from non-native English-speaking countries may be underrepresented in the scientific literature. After the considerable work involved in adding in the more than 300 additional studies found by the February 2016 searches, we chose not to update the search again because additional searches are unlikely to change these overall conclusions in any important way.

Publication rates of abstracts presented at the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists annual scientific meetings: Any change since 2004?

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at annual Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) conferences.

METHODS

The College's Annual Scientific Meetings (ASMs) from 2010 to 2013 were examined, with the goal of comparing these results to the findings of an earlier identical study that examined RANZCR ASMs from 1996 to 1999.

RESULTS

Of the 1152 research abstracts presented, 468 (41%) had been published as full articles. The overall abstract to publication ratio (APR) for radiology was 34% and for radiation oncology was 57%. For oral presentations, these were 44% for radiology and 55% for radiation oncology. Papers were published in a wide variety of journals but 23% of articles appeared in the College's journal, the Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology. The mean time between presentation and publication was 16.5 months (median 17 months).

CONCLUSION

Publication rates are comparable with international reports. The APR has increased since the previous study for both disciplines, but more so for Radiation Oncology.

Publication rates of abstracts presented at major interventional radiology conferences

PURPOSE

We aimed to determine the publication rate and factors predictive of publication of oral presentations at the annual meetings of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe (CIRSE) and the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR).

METHODS

Keywords and authors from oral presentation abstracts at the 2012 CIRSE and SIR annual meetings were used to search PubMed and GoogleScholar for subsequent publication. Logistic regression was performed to identify whether number of authors, country of origin, subject category, methodology, study type, and/or study results were predictive of publication.

RESULTS

A total of 421 abstracts (CIRSE-126, SIR-295) met the inclusion criteria. The overall publication rate across both conferences was 44.9%. Time from conference presentation to publication was 15±8.9 months for CIRSE and 16.3±8.8 months for SIR (P > 0.05), with a combined time interval of 15.9±8.8 months for both. The median impact factor of published abstracts was 2.075 (interquartile range, 2.075-2.775) for CIRSE and 2.093 (2.075-2.856) for SIR (P > 0.05). The most common country of origin for published abstracts was Germany (27.1%) at CIRSE and the United States (69%) at SIR. Logistic regression did not identify factors that were predictive of future publication.

CONCLUSION

Publication rates were similar for CIRSE and SIR. Factors such as country of origin, topic of study and study results were not predictive of future publication. Authors should not be discouraged from submitting their work to journals based on these factors.

The fate of abstracts presented at Turkish national radiology congresses in 2010-2012

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the analysis and publication rates of abstracts presented at the Turkish National Radiology meetings in 2010-2012.

METHODS

Abstracts presented in the national radiology meetings of 2010, 2011, and 2012 were included in the study. The presentations were classified according to presentation type (oral or poster presentations), study type, study design, imaged organ or body systems, imaging modalities, time interval between the presentation and the publication date, and the journal in which the article was published. The conversion rate of presentations into full-text articles in peer-reviewed journals were surveyed through PubMed. The time from presentation in the meetings to publication was determined. The distribution of journals was also demonstrated.

RESULTS

The total number of presentations submitted in three national radiology meetings was 3,192. The publication rate was 11% for the 2010 meeting, 8.2% for the 2011 meeting, and 9.6% for the 2012 meeting. A total of 300 papers were published, with an average of 15 months (range, 0-42 months) between presentation and final publication. The first three refereed international journals with the most number of papers derived from these meetings were Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Clinical Imaging, and European Journal of Radiology.

CONCLUSION

The overall publication rate of scientific abstracts from Turkey was lower than those from overseas countries. Encouraging the authors to conduct higher-quality research would raise the publication rate as well as improve the quality and success of our scientific meetings.

Characteristics and trends in publication of scientific papers presented at the European Congress of Radiology: a comparison between 2000 and 2010

OBJECTIVE

To determine journal publication rates of scientific papers presented orally at the European Congress of Radiology (ECR) 2010, with comparison of country data to ECR 2000.

METHODS

All oral presentations from ECR 2010 were evaluated for publication between 2010 and 2014 using the MEDLINE database. Countries, collaborations, subspecialties, modalities and study design were ranked by publication percentage. Chi-square tests were used to compare publication percentages for each category of variables. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated for each country relative to the host nation, Austria. ECR 2010 country statistics were compared with analogous data from ECR 2000.

RESULTS

In total, 360/840 abstracts were subsequently published (43 %). The author's country of origin (p = 0.02), subspecialty (p = 0.02) and study design (p = 0.001) were significantly associated with subsequent publication. Switzerland, the Netherlands, France and Germany were among the top six countries by publication percentage in 2000 and 2010. In 2010, Switzerland had the highest publication rate (62 %) and HR in comparison to Austria (HR 2.62 [1.31-5.25], p = 0.01). Three Asian nations increased relative publication rates over the 10-year period.

CONCLUSION

Several European nations consistently convert relatively high percentages of oral abstracts at ECR into publications, and the influence of Asian countries is increasing.

MAIN MESSAGES

• Certain European nations consistently publish high percentages of orally presented abstracts at ECR. • The influence of several Asian countries on ECR is increasing. • Country, subspecialty and study design are significantly associated with journal publication. • Authors collaborating internationally have the highest publication rates and mean impact factors. • Among all modalities, PET-CT, MRI and CT have the highest publication percentages.

Analysis of subsequent publication of scientific orally presented abstracts of the French National Congress of Radiology. Part II: Focus on the French abstracts

AIM

To evaluate the publication rate of scientific abstracts that were presented orally at the 2008, 2009, and 2010 annual meetings of the French Society of Radiology by French radiologists, and to perform a French regional analysis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Orally presented abstracts were identified by examining online abstract books of the 2008, 2009, and 2010 annual meetings of the French Society of Radiology, and cross-checked by reviewing the paper version of abstracts for the same period. Only abstracts from French teams were selected. The administrative region of submission was noted for each abstract and for each region the total population, the number of active radiologists, the number of active members of the French Society of Radiology and the number of academic radiologists were noted. Imaging subspecialties were also noted.

RESULTS

625 abstracts were identified resulting in 268 publications (publication rate: 43%). The median number of presentations and publications per region was 18 (range: 1-255) and 7 (range: 0-101), respectively. The ratio per million inhabitants was 7.5 and 3 respectively. The median number of presentations and publications per 100 active radiologists (respectively members of the FSR) was 7 and 3 (respectively 10 and 4). The median number of presentations and publications per academic radiologist were 2.6, and 1.2, respectively. The regional variations for each indicator were high (40-180%). Three subspecialties had a publication rate of more than 50%: thoracic imaging (58%), abdominal imaging (52%), and genitourinary imaging (51%).

CONCLUSION

The publication rate of orally presented French scientific abstracts was high, with important variations according to the regions of origin and imaging subspecialties.

Analysis of subsequent publication of scientific orally presented abstracts of the French national congress of radiology. Part I: General characteristics

PURPOSE

To evaluate the publication rate of scientific abstracts orally presented at the annual meeting of the French Society of Radiology (FSR), and to identify factors associated with publication.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Abstracts were selected from the books of abstracts of the 2008-2010 annual meetings of the FSR. For each abstract, country of origin, diagnostic/interventional radiology, imaging techniques (plain radiography, angiography, ultrasound [US], computed tomography [CT], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]), human/experimental study, retrospective/prospective design, number of subjects, oncologic study or not were noted. Publications were searched in Medline-indexed journals and factors associated analyzed by multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and forty-four abstracts lead to 298 publications (publication rate 40%). Most abstracts reported retrospective studies (61%), in humans (94%), diagnostic imaging (85%), from European authors (90%), and oncology (27%). Median number of subject was 39 (19-87). Main imaging techniques were MRI, CT, US (46%, 29%, 21%). Publications were mostly in English (89%), in radiological journals (72%), with a mean 3.5±3.7 impact factor. Publication was associated with a prospective design (OR=1.80), a submission from Europe (OR=1.71), angiography (OR=2.44), and oncology (OR=1.81).

CONCLUSION

The annual meeting of the FSR is in French, but the rate of publication of presented abstracts is high, mostly in English in reputable journals.

Subsequent full publication of abstracts presented in the annual meetings of the Spanish Society of Cardiology

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The Spanish Society of Cardiology holds an annual national meeting with a large number of presentations but the number of full-text publications resulting from these presentations and the journals accepting these manuscripts is unknown. This study aimed to identify the full-text publication rate of accepted abstracts and to analyze the bibliometric features of subsequent publications.

METHODS

We randomly selected a sample of 300 oral presentations at the meetings of the Spanish Society of Cardiology in 2002, 2005 and 2008. Subsequent publications were identified through the Science Citation Index-Expanded, Scopus, Índice Médico Español, and Índice Bibliográfico Español en Ciencias de la Salud.

RESULTS

Of 300 abstracts, 115 resulted in 147 full publications, representing a publication rate of 38.33%. The meeting with the highest publication rate (43%) was held in 2005. The subject category with the highest number of publications was Pediatric Cardiology/Congenital Heart Disease (58.8%). Time to full publication was usually 2 years (30.61%). Articles were published in 57 journals. The journals publishing the highest number of articles were Revista Española de Cardiología (n=55; 37.41%) and the European Heart Journal (n=8; 5.44%).

CONCLUSIONS

The high percentage of articles published in the upper half of journals listed in Journal Citation Reports under the category of cardiac and cardiovascular system (83%) can be taken as an objective quality indicator of the results presented at these meetings. However, more than 60% of the abstracts did not result in full publications, thus depriving the scientific community of potentially interesting results.

Publication rate of scientific abstracts presented at ESSR 2008 and 2009

OBJECTIVE

During the ESSR 2011 Research Committee Meeting, the duration of intellectual property of a research proposal was discussed. A duration of 2 years from idea to publication was suggested. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how many ESSR 2008 and 2009 scientific abstracts were PubMed cited in print within 2 years of the congress.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In September of 2011, two researchers independently performed a literature search using author names and title words of all ESSR 2008 and 2009 scientific abstracts published in Skeletal Radiology. In case of similarity or doubt, a senior reviewer made the final decision. Publication details were recorded and analyses were performed in Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA).

RESULTS

Until September of 2011, 62 out of 137 ESSR 2008 and 2009 scientific abstracts (45%) were PubMed cited in print [2008: 34/73 (47%); 2009: 28/64 (44%)]. 54 out of 137 abstracts (39%) were PubMed cited in print within 2 years of the congress [2008: 30/73(41%); 2009: 23/64 (36%)] including eight out of 137 abstracts (6%), which were already published before the congress [2008: 4/73 (5%); 2009: 4/64 (6%)]. The top-ranking journal in absolute numbers of publications was Skeletal Radiology. The top publishing country was the United Kingdom. Study sample size and first author position between abstract and publication did not change in the majority.

CONCLUSIONS

Thirty-nine percent of ESSR 2008 and 2009 scientific abstracts were published within 2 years of the congress including 6% that were already PubMed cited in print before the congress.

Publication rates of abstracts presented at five national pharmacy association meetings

BACKGROUND

Abstract presentations at professional meetings provide a medium for disseminating the findings of scholarly activity. Rates of abstract publication from various biomedical disciplines have been evaluated, with pharmacy noted to be lower than other specialties. Previous research on pharmacy abstract publication rates was conducted for a limited number of professional meetings but has not been assessed using Google Scholar.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the full publication rate of abstracts presented at the 2005 American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) Spring and Annual Meetings, American Pharmacists Association (APhA) Annual Meeting, and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) Summer and Midyear Clinical Meetings.

METHODS

Publication status was assessed for abstracts presented during the 2005 ACCP Spring and Annual Meetings, APhA Annual Meeting, and ASHP Summer and Midyear Clinical Meetings using PubMed and Google Scholar. Data collected included abstract category, study category, practice site, database(s) in which publication appeared, time in months to publication, publication type, and journal of publication.

RESULTS

Evaluation of 2,000 abstracts presented in 2005 revealed an overall full publication rate of 19.8% (n = 384). Nearly all pharmacy abstracts were published as manuscripts (98.4%; n=378) and indexed in PubMed and Google Scholar (91.9%; n = 353), although a significant percentage were indexed in Google Scholar only (7.8%; n = 30). The mean time to full publication was 16.8 months (SD ±11.9 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Results were consistent with previously reported full publication rates of abstracts from pharmacy association meetings, indicating that abstracts presented at pharmacy meetings continue to have a lower full publication rate than other health disciplines.

A scoping review about conference objectives and evaluative practices: how do we get more out of them?

Large multi-day conferences have often been criticized as ineffective ways to improve social outcomes and to influence policy or practice. Unfortunately, many conference evaluations have also been inadequate in determining the impact of a conference on its associated social sector, with little evidence gathered or analyzed to substantiate or refute these criticisms. The aim of this scoping review is to investigate and report stakeholders' objectives for planning or participating in large multi-day conferences and how these objectives are being evaluated. We conducted a scoping review supplemented by a small number of key informant interviews. Eight bibliographic databases were systematically searched to identify papers describing conference objectives and/or evaluations. We developed a conference evaluation framework based on theoretical models and empirical findings, which structured the descriptive synthesis of the data. We identified 3,073 potential papers for review, of which 44 were included in this study. Our evaluation framework connects five key elements in planning a conference and its evaluation (number in brackets refers to number of themes identified): conference objectives (8), purpose of evaluation (7), evaluation methods (5), indicators of success (9) and theories/models (8). Further analysis of indicators of success identified three categories of indicators with differing scopes (i.e. immediate, prospective or follow-up) as well as empirical links between the purpose of evaluations and these indicators. Conference objectives and evaluations were largely correlated with the type of conference (i.e. academic, political/governmental or business) but diverse overall. While much can be done to improve the quality and usefulness of conference evaluations, there are innovative assessments that are currently being utilized by some conferences and warrant further investigation. This review provides conference evaluators and organizers a simple resource to improve their own assessments by highlighting and categorizing potential objectives and evaluation strategies.

Publication rates for abstracts presented by Korean investigators at major radiology meetings

Objective

To determine the publication rate of abstracts presented by Korean investigators at national and international radiological meetings, and to identify predictive factors of publication.

Materials and Methods

Abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the Korean Radiological Society (KRS), and abstracts presented by Korean investigators at the annual meetings of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) and European Congress of Radiology (ECR) from 2001 to 2002 were searched for subsequent publication, using PubMed and the Korean Medical Database. The following variables were evaluated. 1) The overall publication rate; 2) the publication rates according to the radiological subspecialty, presentation type (oral or poster), sample size (≤ 20, 21-50, or > 50), study design (prospective or retrospective), statistical analysis (present or absent), and study outcome (positive or negative); 3) the time to publication; 4) the journal where the study was published; 5) consistency between the abstract and the final publication.

Results

Of 1,097 abstracts, 301 (27.4%) were subsequently published, at an average of 15.8 ± 13.8 months after presentation in 48 journals. The publication rates for studies presented at the RSNA (35.4%) and ECR (50.5%) conferences were significantly higher than that for the KRS conference (23.6%, p < 0.05). Vascular/interventional radiology studies had the highest publication rate (33.1%), whereas musculoskeletal radiology studies had the lowest publication rate (17.1%). Other factors associated with subsequent publication were prospective design, use of statistical testing, and a positive study outcome.

Conclusion

The publication rate is significantly lower for the KRS (23.6%) meeting abstracts as compared to those of the RSNA (35.4%) and ECR (50.5%). Prospective design, use of statistical testing, and positive study outcome have a statistically significant effect on the publication rate.