Scientific impact of Association for Academic Surgery and Society of University Surgeons plenary session abstracts increases in the era of the Academic Surgical Congress from 2006 to 2010

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.

Near-Infrared Intraoperative Molecular Imaging Can Locate Metastases to the Lung

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary metastasectomy is widely accepted for many tumor types because it may prolong survival and potentially cure some patients. However, intraoperative localization of pulmonary metastases can be technically challenging. We propose that intraoperative near-infrared (NIR) molecular imaging can be used as an adjunct during disease localization.

METHODS

We inoculated 50 C57BL/6 mice with Lewis lung carcinoma (LLC) flank tumors. After flank tumor growth, mice were injected through the tail vein with indocyanine green (ICG) before operation, and intraoperative imaging was used to detect pulmonary metastases. On the basis of these experiments, we enrolled 8 patients undergoing pulmonary metastasectomy into a pilot and feasibility clinical trial. Each patient received intravenous ICG 1 day before operation, followed by wedge or segmental resection. Samples were imaged on the back table with an NIR camera to confirm disease presence and margins. All murine and human tumors and margins were confirmed by pathologic examination.

RESULTS

Mice had an average of 4 ± 2 metastatic tumors on both lungs, with an average size of 5.1 mm (interquartile range [IQR] 2.2 mm to 7.6 mm). Overall, 200 of 211 (95%) metastatic deposits were markedly fluorescent, with a mean tumor-to-background ratio (TBR) of 3.4 (IQR 3.1 to 4.1). The remaining tumors had a TBR below 1.5. In the human study, intraoperative NIR imaging identified six of the eight preoperatively localized lesions. Intraoperative back table NIR imaging identified all metastatic lesions, which were confirmed by pathologic examination. The average tumor size was 1.75 ± 1.4 cm, and the mean ex vivo TBR was 3.3 (IQR 3.1 to 3.7). Pathologic examination demonstrated melanoma (n = 4), osteogenic sarcoma (n = 2), renal cell carcinoma (n = 2), chondrosarcoma (n = 1), leiomyosarcoma (n = 1), and colorectal carcinoma (n = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic ICG identifies subcentimeter tumor metastases to the lung in murine models, and this work provides proof of principle in humans. Future research is focused on improving depth of penetration into the lung parenchyma.

The positive association of Association for Academic Surgery membership with academic productivity

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the academic productivity and National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding of members of the Association for Academic Surgery (AAS).

METHODS

Academic metrics including, numbers of publications, citations, and NIH funding history were determined for 4015 surgical faculty at the top 55 NIH-funded departments of surgery, using Scopus, NIH RePORT, and the Grantome online databases.

RESULTS

AAS membership included 20.5% (824) of all 4015 surgical faculty in this database. For members of the AAS, publications (P) ± standard deviation and citations (C) ± SD were P: 54 ± 96 and C: 985 ± 3321, compared with P: 31 ± 92, C: 528 ± 3001 for nonmembers, P < 0.001. Higher academic productivity among AAS members was observed across all subspecialty types and was especially pronounced for assistant and associate professors. AAS membership was also associated with increased rates of NIH funding and better productivity for equally funded surgical faculty compared with nonmembers. Analysis of AAS membership by subspecialty revealed that AAS members were most commonly general surgery faculty (57.8%); however, only 7.4% of the faculty was affiliated with cardiothoracic surgery. There was also a lack of dedicated science and/or research faculty (0.6% versus 3.4%) among the members of the AAS.

CONCLUSIONS

AAS membership appears to be correlated with greater academic performance among junior and midlevel surgical faculty. This improvement is observed regardless of subspecialty. Increased participation of faculty within subspecialties such as cardiothoracic surgery and, a greater focus on increasing the numbers of dedicated research faculty within the AAS may help increase the scientific impact and productivity among members of the society.