Publication rates of podium and poster abstract presentations at the 2010 and 2011 society of gynecologic oncology conferences

Publication rates of podium presentations at the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) annual meetings

OBJECTIVES

Our study aimed to determine the publication rates of podium presentations from the 2017 and 2018 Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) Annual Meetings; and to examine rates and predictors of oral presentations that resulted in publication.

METHODS

We reviewed podium presentations given at the 2017 and 2018 SGO Annual Meetings. Abstracts were evaluated for publication from January 1, 2017 to March 30, 2020 and January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2021, respectively, to allow for a 3 year period of publication.

RESULTS

In 2017 and 2018, 43 of 75 (57.3%) and 47 of 83 (56.6%) podium presentations were published within 3 years, respectively. No significant difference was found between the mean time to publication within 3 years (13.0 months vs 14.1 months for 2017 and 2018, respectively; p=0.96). Similarly, the mean difference of journal impact factors between both years did not reach significance (6.57 and 10.7 for 2017 and 2018, respectively; p=0.09). The median impact factor (IF) was 4.54 (range: 40.3) and 4.62 (range: 70.7) in 2017 and 2018, respectively. Of the presentations published, 53.4% (2017) and 38.3% (2018) appeared in the journal Gynecologic Oncology. Significant positive correlations for the likelihood of publication were determined among the following: funding status (r=0.93) including funding involving National Institutes for Health (r=0.91) or pharmaceutical (r=0.95), clinical trial study design (r=0.94), and pre-clinical research (r=0.95) (all p<0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

At the 2017 and 2018 SGO Annual Meetings 57% of podium presentations were published in a peer-reviewed journal within 3 years. Publication in peer-reviewed journals is crucial for timely distribution of clinical information to the medical community.

Publication rates of annual Research Day abstracts in peer-reviewed journals by residents and fellows at a community-based institution - A 10-year review of data and analysis

Introduction

Research and publications are becoming increasingly important for residents who want to match into competitive fellowship training programs and fellows looking to optimize career opportunities. Institutional Research Days provide trainees the opportunity to gain presentation experience and feedback about their studies. We evaluated all abstracts that were presented at Ascension Providence Hospital (APH) during Research Day over a 10-year period to determine publication rates of manuscripts in peer-reviewed journals.

Methods

Research abstracts presented by both residents and fellows during Research Days at APH from 2009 to 2018 were reviewed. Abstracts were classified by type of project, type of presentation, trainee, winners and non-winners, and training program. Winners were defined as abstracts which won first, second and third place awards. Publication of manuscripts was evaluated by searching PubMed and Google Scholar. Fisher's Exact test was used to analyze categorical data and Student's t-test was used to analyze continuous data; p < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

A total of 491 research and case report abstracts were presented by residents and fellows during Research Day over 10 years. For residents, 346 abstracts were presented; 25% (n = 85) were winners. The majority (51%) of winning abstracts were published, but only 26% of non-winning abstracts were published (p < 0.0001). More of both winning research oral (65%) and poster abstracts (61%) were published than non-winning oral (41%) and poster abstracts (22%, p = 0.02 and p = 0.0001, respectively), but publication rates for case reports were similar. The vast majority of published winning oral (88%) and poster abstracts (74%) came from the surgical programs. Fellows presented 145 abstracts; 30% (n = 43) were winners. A slightly higher percentage of winning abstracts (42%) were published compared to non-winning abstracts (32%, p = 0.3). Unlike the residents, the fellows had no significant publication rate differences between winning and non-winning research oral, research poster or case report abstracts, or between medical and non-medical subspecialties.

Conclusions

Despite their award-winning presentations, residents and fellows published less than half of these projects and less than a third of non-award-winning projects. However, most publications came from the surgical specialties, indicating the colleagues in the medical specialties were not publishing. Further data are needed to identify factors that can improve a trainee's chances of being published in a peer-reviewed journal.

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.

Analysis of conference abstracts of prosthodontic randomised-controlled trials presented at IADR general sessions (2002-2015): a cross-sectional study of the relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication

OBJECTIVES

To analyse the relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication rate of conference abstracts of prosthodontic randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) presented at International Association for Dental Research (IADR) general sessions (2002-2015).

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study on conference abstracts.

METHODS

Conference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002-2015) were obtained. Literature search was performed in multiple databases to confirm the final publication status of conference abstracts. Two investigators independently extracted the data including conference date, origin, presentation type, exact p value, number of centres, institution type, overall conclusion, subspecialty, publication time and journal. The reporting quality of abstracts was assessed by two investigators according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. The relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication was analysed by χ² test.

SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Final publication rate, demographic characteristics and reporting quality of conference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002-2015).

RESULTS

Of the 340 prosthodontic RCT abstracts, 43.24% were published. The mean time to final publication was 22.86 months. Europe contributed the most number of abstracts but Asia and Australia had the highest publication rate. Oral presentation, multicentre trial and complete denture and overdenture subspecialty were associated with a higher publication rate. Reporting quality of eligibility criteria of participants, random assignment and primary outcome results for each group correlated with a higher final publication rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Over half of conference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002-2015) were unpublished. Oral presentation and multiple centres were associated with higher publication rates. Abstracts' reporting quality addressing participant recruitment, assignment and primary results correlated with trials' validity and applicability. Conference attendees may refer to this research to identify valid and applicable prosthodontic trials but should treat and apply results cautiously.

Publication outcomes of abstracts presented at 2013 North American Congress of Clinical Toxicology (NACCT) conference

Introduction: Scientific conferences are useful in disseminating medical research and advancing the medical and scientific fields. An important measure of the success of such conferences is the proportion of research that is published in peer-reviewed journals. The conversion rates for toxicology abstracts to full-text publications at previous North American toxicology meetings were low. No study has assessed the publication rate from the 2013 North American Congress of Clinical Toxicology (NACCT) conference.Methods: We reviewed 316 abstracts presented at the 2013 NACCT Conference. We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline databases using the authors' names and keywords, through September 2019. We then identified and excluded cases and case reports to reanalyze the data.Results: Thirty-three of 316 abstracts (10.4%) subsequently appeared in 17 different peer-reviewed journals, led by Clinical Toxicology (13 out of 33, 3%). Leading countries of origin for abstract submission were the USA (285), Canada (9), and the UK (8). Excluding case reports, 25 out of 207 abstracts (12.0%) achieved publication in peer-reviewed journals.Conclusions: Fewer than one in eight abstracts reached publication within six years of the 2013 NACCT meeting, even after accounting for and excluding case reports. This rate is lower than in other specialty medical societies.

Publication rate of podium presentations from the orthopaedic research society annual meeting

Annual scientific meetings serve as a forum for dissemination of new research findings. Presentations should be of high scientific quality as they have the potential to impact future research projects and current clinical practice. The publication rate of podium presentations at an annual meeting can be used to assess the quality of the research presented. The purpose of this study was to determine the publication rate of podium presentations at the Orthopaedic Research Society (ORS) annual meeting. All podium presentations from the 2012 to 2014 annual ORS meetings were identified. Abstracts were categorized into an orthopaedic topic. A PubMed search was performed to determine if an abstract reached publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The publication rate was determined for each year. Of the 1063 podium presentations identified, 640 (60.2%) reached publication in a peer-reviewed journal. No significant differences were observed in the publication rate between the orthopaedic topics (p = 0.3414). The majority (75.9%) of published abstracts reached publication within 2 years of presentation and the average time to publication was 17.0 months. Abstracts were published in 151 different journals with an average impact factor of 4.46. Time to publication varied significantly by journal (p = 0.025). Journal of Orthopaedic Research, Journal of Biomechanics, PLoS ONE, Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, and Bone were the most common publication journals. This study provides insight into the quality of podium presentations at the ORS annual meeting. The ORS annual meeting compares favorably to other orthopaedic surgery meetings. © 2018 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 37:288-292, 2019.