Publication rates of presentations at the Irish Orthopaedic Association annual meeting

Publication rate of studies presented at the French Arthroscopic Society Meeting in 2014

INTRODUCTION

Publication rates for studies reported at French Arthroscopic Society (Société francophone d'arthroscopie, SFA) meetings are not known. A comprehensive search of podium presentations to the 2014 SFA meeting was performed, assessing: (1) publication rate for meeting abstracts, and (2) bibliometric parameters including journal Impact Factor.

HYPOTHESIS

The full-text publication rate for abstracts accepted for the 2014 French Arthroscopic Society (SFA) meeting was around 47.1%: i.e., the rate reported for the 2013 meeting of the French Society of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology (SoFCOT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Bibliometric analysis of all abstracts accepted for the 2014 SFA annual meeting was undertaken by the Junior French Arthroscopic Society (SFA Junior), who collated the podium presentations. Reported studies were retrospective in 43 cases (54%) and prospective in 36 (46%). They consisted in clinical studies in 52/79 cases (66%), experimental studies in 4 (5%), cadaver or animal studies in 13 (16.5%), epidemiological studies in 8 (10%), a case report in 1 (1.2%) and a literature review in 1 (1.2%). Thirty-two (40.5%) concerned the shoulder and 31 (39%) the knee. Publication was checked on systematic PubMed-Medline search of authors' names. Articles found on PubMed-Medline were downloaded into the SIGAPS scientific publication search, management and analysis system database. Journal impact factor and SIGAPS category (A to E) were obtained, as were number of citations and h-index. This was a descriptive study, assessing numbers; results were reported as number and percentage.

RESULTS

Overall publication rate was 31/79 (39.2%): 20/31 clinical studies (64.5%), 6 cadaver studies (19.4%), 3 epidemiology studies (9.7%), 1 experimental study (3.2%) and 1 literature review (3.2%). Mean 2014 SFA meeting-to-publication time was 18.7 months [range, -2 to 60 months]. Journal SIGAPS categories were A for 4 articles (13.3%), B for 13 (43.3%), C for 3 (10%), D for 9 (30%), with no E category articles but 1 article (3.3%) without SIGAPS category.

CONCLUSION

The publication rate for abstracts accepted for report to the 2014 SFA annual meeting was lower than for the 2013 SoFCOT meeting. The high level of the journals in question testified to the quality of the studies reported at the SFA meeting.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study.

Publication of abstracts presented at the Irish Paediatric Association conference

BACKGROUND

The proportion of abstracts presented at medical conferences that are subsequently published is a potentially useful surrogate for the quality of the material presented. The mean publication percentage for paediatric conference abstracts reported in the literature is 39%. The publication of abstracts presented at the Irish Paediatric Association's (IPA) annual conference have not previously been explored.

AIM

To identify the subsequent publication proportion for abstracts presented at the IPA annual conference and to identify factors associated with a higher likelihood of publication.

METHODS

As 95% of publications occur within 5 years of conference presentation, abstracts from the 2008 to 2012 IPA conferences were selected for analysis. A PubMed/Medline search was conducted using the author's names and, if required, abstract keywords. For comparability with previous studies, articles were deemed published if they were full journal articles, contained at least one similar author and reported similar outcomes.

RESULTS

Over the 5-year study period, 584 IPA abstracts were presented. The percentage of abstracts published was 19.7%. One hundred and fifteen articles were published in 45 different journals; 31 (27%) of these were published in the Irish Medical Journal. The percentage of abstracts published was significantly higher for oral presentations (23% vs. 15%; p = 0.012), university-associated abstracts (31% vs. 16%; p < 0.001) and interventional studies (52% vs. 18%; p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, only university association and interventional studies remained significantly associated with publication.

CONCLUSION

The percentage of IPA abstracts that were published was low when compared internationally. Further analysis is required to explore the reasons underpinning this.

Factors associated with the publication outcomes of paediatric proceedings presented at 2010-2016 the International Associations for Dental Research annual meetings

The International Associations for Dental Research (IADR) annual meeting is one of the most important dental meetings throughout the world, and researches about paediatric dentistry presented in this platform are often used to guide clinical work. To evaluate the publication outcomes of oral and poster paediatric proceedings, which were accepted by the International Associations for Dental Research (IADR), annual meetings from 2010 to 2016 and to analyse the possible factors influencing an abstract's progression to publication. Oral and poster abstracts were retrieved from the official website of IADR (2010-2016). Searching for subsequent publications was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar (up to March 2019). Two authors independently selected studies, collected, and analysed data. A total of 1396 abstracts were identified, including 275 oral presentations and 1121 poster presentations. Finally, 606 were published in peer-reviewed journals, with a publication rate of 43.41%. Abstracts were published earlier if it is from Europe, well funded, presented orally, or with large sample size. The high publication rate of the IADR proceedings supported the impact of IADR annual meetings on paediatric dentistry in the last 10 years.

Characteristics and trends in publications of abstracts presented at the Canadian Ophthalmological Society Annual Meetings: 2010-2015

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the publication rate of abstracts presented at the Canadian Ophthalmological Society (COS) Annual Meetings from 2010 to 2015.

DESIGN

A retrospective review and literature search of abstracts presented at the COS Annual Meetings from 2010 to 2015.

METHODS

Abstracts were obtained from the scientific programs for the 2010-2015 COS meetings, excluding 2014 (data unavailable). Title, author number, presentation type, subspecialty, institution, and study design were collected. MEDLINE and PubMed were searched in duplicate using abstract title, key words, and authors. Publication date, journal, impact factor, and citation score were recorded for each publication. Publication rates were determined by year of abstract presentation, presentation type, study type, subspecialty, author number, institution, and time to publication.

RESULTS

876 abstracts were presented, of which 326 (37.3%) were posters and 548 (62.7%) were oral presentations. The publication rate was 42.9% (375 publications) with a 16-month median time to publication. The publication rate did not vary significantly by presentation type or year. Publication rates were highest among vision rehabilitation (75.0%) and glaucoma (52.0%) subspecialties; basic science research (65.0%) and systematic reviews/meta analyses (62.0%) study designs had the highest representation. Most presentations were published in the Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology (117 presentations, 31.2%). The mean impact factor and citation score for published abstracts were 2.39 ± 2.3 and 1.70 ± 1.16, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The publication rate of abstracts presented at the COS Annual Meetings has remained stable across this 5-year analysis. Publication rates are comparable to those of other specialty conferences.

Full text publication rates of papers presented at the British Foot and Ankle Society

BACKGROUND

Techniques in foot and ankle surgery have expanded rapidly in recent years, often presented at national society meetings. It is important that research is published to guide evidence based practice. Many abstracts however do not go on to full text publication.

METHODS

A database was created of all abstracts presented at BOFAS meetings from 2009 to 2013. Computerised searches were performed using PubMed and Google search engines.

RESULTS

In total 341 papers were presented, with an overall publication rate of 31.7%. Of 251 clinical papers, 200 were case series (79.6%). Factors associated with publication success included basic science studies, papers related to arthroscopic surgery and research performed outside the UK.

CONCLUSION

A relatively low conversion rate from presentation to publication could be as a result of papers failing to pass the scrutiny of peer review, or that the work is never formally submitted for publication. The information from this study could be used to prioritise future research and promote higher quality research.

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.

Analysis of subsequent publication and impact of abstracts presented at the Sir Peter Freyer Surgical Symposium: Focus on the Plenary Session

BACKGROUND

The quality of abstracts presented at a conference reflects the academic activity and research productivity of the surgical/scientific association concerned. The abstract to publication rate (44.5 % internationally), is an important indicator of the quality of presented research.

AIM

To evaluate the publication rate and impact of abstracts presented at the plenary session of the Sir Peter Freyer Surgical Symposium over a 25-year period (1989-2014), and identify factors influencing publication.

METHODS

Plenary abstracts were identified from abstract books of the Symposium from 1989-2014. The authors, institution, subspecialty and research subject were recorded. A Medline search with name of the first and last author, key words and content of all abstracts was conducted to identify related publications. The impact factor (IF) of the journal and the time to publication was recorded.

RESULTS

298 presented abstracts resulted in 168 publications (publication rate: 56 %). Basic Science research accounted for 80 % (n = 237) of the total number of presentations with the remaining 20 % (n = 61) being categorised as clinical research. Overall, cancer research accounted for 48 % of presented work. The average time to publication was 2 ± 7 years, while 11 % of all published studies achieved publication in the year of the symposium. The median impact factor for published research was 3.558 (IF range 0-39).

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that the quality of papers presented at the Sir Peter Freyer Surgical Symposium compares favourably with international equivalents, making this meeting an important forum for Irish Academic Surgery.

"Publish or perish"-presentations at annual national orthopaedic meetings and their correlation with subsequent publication

Background

Presentation of research at annual national orthopaedic conferences not only serves as a forum for the dissemination of knowledge but is also often a requirement of orthopaedic training programmes. The expected outcome is publication in a peer-reviewed journal. However, publication rates vary for a variety of reasons. The objective of this study was to determine publication rates of presentations from our local Singapore Orthopaedic Association (SOA) annual scientific meeting (ASM) and some of the potential associated factors. We also compared our findings to equivalent meetings worldwide to assess value of scientific content of various orthopaedic conferences.

Methods

All presentations of six SOA ASMs were entered into a database. Using presentation titles, author names and keywords in PubMed and Google Scholar, we determined how many presentations progressed to publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Various comparisons were made to determine factors that could influence publication rates. A comparison with national orthopaedic meetings of America, United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, Germany, Turkey and Brazil was also conducted.

Results

Excluding the ASMs with less than 4 years of follow-up, the publication rate was 35.8%. Both podium and international presenters were found to have significantly higher publication rates than poster and local presenters, respectively, while basic science and clinical research were found to have equivalent rates. Publication rates from other countries’ national conferences ranged between 26.6% and 58.1%.

Conclusions

We suggest that the quality of a presentation is related to its subsequent publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Our findings support the general consensus that the annual meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) is the gold standard for the dissemination of orthopaedic knowledge updates and advancements in our specialty. Each national orthopaedic association could determine the ratio of “presentations at ASM” to “publication within five years of presentation” and use this as a measure of their annual conference’s impact on the addition and advancement to the orthopaedic literature. This tool may in turn assist clinicians in determining which meetings to attend.

Low publication rate of 2005 conference presentations: implications for practitioners serving individuals with autism and intellectual disabilities

This study determined the percentage of presentations at the annual conference of the Association for Behavior Analysis in 2005 with the autism (AUT) and developmental disabilities (DDA) codes (N=880) that (a) provided continuing education credits (CEs) for Board Certified Behavior Analysts (BCBAs) and Board Certified Assistant Behavior Analysts (BCaBAs) and (b) included content that was published in a peer-reviewed outlet. Results indicate that only 77 (8.8%) presentations were ultimately published. Although posters were not eligible for CEs, posters accounted for 57.1% of the published presentations. Specifically, posters presented by a university-affiliated presenter accounted for 44.2% of presentations with published content. As a whole, only 10.4% of AUT and DDA presentations offering CEs contained data sets that were published. Considered together, these results suggest that the content provided to BCBAs and BCaBAs for CEs may not be adequately measured or sufficiently rigorous to guide clinical practices.