What happens to the abstracts presented at the Societè Internationale d'Urologie meeting?

The Scientific Value of Abstracts on Prostate Cancer Presented at the European Association of Urology Congresses

Background: Scientific congresses are an important medium for presenting recent clinical findings. Publication of abstracts allows wider dissemination.

Objectives: To determine the publication rates of prostate cancer abstracts presented at the annual congress of the European Association of Urology (EAU).

Design, Setting, and Participants: All abstracts with the term prostate cancer or carcinoma presented at the congress of the European Association of Urology from 2015 to 2018 were analyzed. We captured their publication rate, journal impact factor and time to publication. Moreover, we formulated a scoring system to determine the grade of discrepancy between the conclusions mentioned in the congress abstract and published abstract.

Results: A total of 834 abstracts presented at EAU annual meeting included prostate cancer or carcinoma in their title. We recorded a publication rate of 56.8% with 474 of the 834 abstracts being published with a mean time of 12.5 months.

Conclusion: Approximately, 57% of the prostate cancer abstracts presented at the EAU congress are published in peer reviewed journals. This acceptance rate indicates the high distribution and dissemination of these abstracts.

[Urological research in Germany : A retrospective, longitudinal observational study]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The congress of the German Society of Urology reflects urologic research in German-speaking countries. The objective was to identify trends by analyzing the congress' abstracts and following full publications longitudinally.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The abstracts of the 2016 congress were systematically analyzed regarding content, study design, cooperation, following full publications and journals which they were published in. Thereafter, the 2016 congress was compared to the 2002 and 2009 congresses. Statistical analysis included χ²-, Mann-Whitney U-, Cochran-Armitage-, and Kruskal-Wallis test.

RESULTS

A total of 1073 abstracts were presented at the 2002, 2009, and 2016 congresses. We found an increase in abstracts regarding prostate disease (24.2%, 29.7%, and 34.0%; p = 0.0043), oncological abstracts (50.6%, 57.9%, and 61.7%; p = 0.003), multicenter studies (18.3, 28.6, and 34.3%; p < 0.0001) and cooperation (55.6%, 62.9%, and 70.5%, p < 0.0001). Experimental (29.0%, 33.2%, and 22.8%; p = 0.009) and prospective studies (62.1%, 42.0%, and 36.0%; p < 0.0001) declined. Abstracts including statistical analysis (18.4%, 14.7%, and 41.2%; p < 0.0001) and the impact factor of following full publications (2.08, 3.42, 4.42; p < 0.0001) rose. In 2016, 11.2% of those full publications were published Open Access. The publication rates of the presented abstracts were 49.1%, 56.3%, and 52.3%, respectively (p = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

National and international networking of the urological research community has increased. Presentation of prospective studies has declined. The rate of peer-reviewed full publications following the DGU abstracts remains at a stable high level over the three congresses. The publication rate in Open Access journals is low.

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.

An Analysis of Factors Predicting Successful Transition From Pancreatology Abstracts to Full Publications

OBJECTIVES

Historically, less than half of peer-reviewed abstracts are published. We set out to determine how many pancreas-related abstracts are published within 5 years of presentation at gastroenterology conferences and to determine a model that predicts successful transition from abstract to journal publication.

METHODS

We collected data on study design from all pancreas-related abstracts at the 2010 Digestive Disease Week (DDW), American College of Gastroenterology, and American Pancreatic Association conferences. We then determined whether an abstract was published by October 2015 using a standardized search algorithm.

RESULTS

Of 412 abstracts, 39.8% were published. Studies that were of basic science or translational design (P = 0.02, 0.01, respectively); had more listed authors (P = 0.05); employed randomized, prospective, and multicenter methodology (P = 0.02); and were accepted to DDW (P = 0.02) were more likely to be published. After regression, basic/translational studies (P = 0.002, 0.02, respectively) and DDW-accepted abstracts (P = 0.004) continued to predict successful publication.

CONCLUSIONS

It is not clear why only 40% of the pancreas abstracts from 2010 were published 5 years later. Some abstracts may go unpublished because of methodological flaws that escape detection during abstract peer review. Therefore, physicians should use caution when applying abstract data to their clinical decision making.

Publication outcome of abstracts presented at the AACC annual meeting

BACKGROUND

Failure to publish study results causes duplication of effort and is a significant source of waste. It also can lead to distortions in the evidence base that can lead to misallocation of resources and medical harm. Failure to publish is commonly studied by comparing the conversion rate of meeting abstracts or publication rate of registered trials and has not been studied in clinical chemistry. The objective of this study was to determine the abstract conversion rate in clinical chemistry.

METHODS

For the set of abstracts published from the 2011 annual meeting of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry, we determined which converted to full publications and which had not. We used 3 methods to match publications to abstracts: 1) a survey sent to corresponding authors of abstracts, 2) a web scrape of Google Scholar, and PubMed, and 3) a manual search using Scopus. Publication rates were compared by topic, country of corresponding author, institution type, and award recognition.

RESULTS

Matching publications were found for 38% (95% CI: 34-42%) of the abstracts. The acceptance rate for submitted manuscripts was 34% (95% CI: 28-43%) among those who responded to the survey. Publication rates varied by topic (range 13% to 59%); rates from academic institutions were higher than commercial institutions (42% vs 16%, p<0.001). The publication rate of abstracts recognized "with distinction" was significantly greater than the publication rate of non-winners (68% vs 37%, p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

A significant proportion of abstracts presented at the AACC national meeting are not followed by full publication.

Publication rates of full-text journal articles converted from abstracts presented during the 22(nd) Turkish National Urology Congress

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the publication rates of full-text journal articles converted from the abstracts presented in the 22(nd) Turkish National Urology Congress in 2012.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 576 abstracts accepted for presentation at the 22(nd) Turkish National Urology Association Meeting were identified from the published abstract book. The abstracts were categorized into subsections such as endourology and pediatric urology. The subsequent publication rate for the studies was evaluated by scanning PubMed Medline. Abstracts published before the proceedings were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

The abstracts were categorized as being presented orally (n=155), by poster (n=421), or by video (n=78). Of the 28 (18.3%) of 155 oral and 34 (8.15%) of 421 poster presentations, were subsequently published in several journals until March 2015. The publication rates of the abstracts based on urology subsections were as follows: neurology (25%), andrology (18.6%), endourology (17.2%), urolithiasis (15.3%), general urology (12.5%), infectious diseases (7.14%), pediatric urology (6.25%), uro-gynecology (6.06%), reconstructive urology (5.8%), and urooncology (3.8%). The average time to publication was 11.77 (0-33) months.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study assessing the publication rates of abstracts presented at a Turkish National Urology Congress. It reveals that more qualified randomized studies need to be done to improve the rate of publication.

[The fate of the oral communications presented at the SIFUD congress (2006-2012)]

INTRODUCTION

The subjects presented at scientific congresses often remain confidential because of the non-indexation of the communications. A subsequent publication is necessary for the dissemination of knowledge. The value of a congress is somehow rated by the level of its publications.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze, quantitatively and qualitatively, the fate of the communications presented orally at the annual meeting of the SIFUD-PP between 2006 and 2012.

METHOD

From the authors' names and the title of the communications presented orally at congresses between 2006 and 2012, we investigated if those communications had resulted as an indexed publication PubMed/Medline until April 2015. We studied anonymously the correlation between the data presented in the communication provided at the SIFUD-PP congress and the data published in the final article. We evaluated the "value" of the publication according to the language of publication (French/English), the ranking of the magazine (A or B versus others), and the number of citations of the article in Google-Scholar.

RESULTS

A total of 270 oral communications were presented at the SIFUD congress between 2006 and 2012, so an average of 38.5 (±15) per year. Globally, 110 articles (40%) have been published in an indexed journal PubMed/MedLine to date (April 2015). Note that 10 articles of the oral communications (8%) were published before the congress. The average time of publication was 22 months±15 months. In terms of the language of publication, 79 articles (71%) were published in English magazines. They were published in 31 different journals (49 articles [44%] in urology, 14 articles [12%] in gynecology, 12 articles [10%] in urogynecology, 11 articles [10%] in coloproctology, 16 articles [14%] in neuro-urology and physical medicine and rehabilitation, 3 articles [2%] in sexology). Sixty-three articles (57%) were published in journals with an impact factor (IF) higher than 2 and 39 articles (35%) were published in journals of rank A or B.

DISCUSSION

The rate of publications of oral communications varies according to specialties and the type of the congress. For example, the rate of the published communications at the ICS Congress (International Continence Society) in 2003 was 61% and of the AFU (French Association of Urology) in 2000, was 34.5%. The rate of publication of the oral abstracts presented at the SIFUD (40% over the period 2006-2012) is comparable to other national congresses but slightly inferior to those of international congresses. Several hypotheses may explain the non-publication of the oral communications (quitting the project, communication about preliminary results, refused publication by many journals) and unfortunately we do not have those results. We should get back individually to the submitters to know the reasons for non-publication of their works.

CONCLUSION

In the end, 40% of the oral communication presented at the annual congress of the SIFUD were published in an indexed journals PubMed/MedLine. Seventy-one percent of them are in English.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Conversion rates of abstracts to publications from the Irish Society of Urology Annual Meeting (2005–2011) – Questioning the scientific value of national urological meetings for smaller European nations

Background:

Large annual scientific meetings such as the American Urological Association (AUA) and the European Association of Urology (EUA) have abstract conversion rates into publication of 37%−48%. There are no data on the conversion rates from national meetings of smaller European countries. Our objective was to present the conversion rates and manuscript characteristics of the Irish Society of Urology (ISU) annual meeting over a seven-year period (2005–2011), and to demonstrate the value, viability and sustainability of such a meeting as a model for other small national research programmes.

Methods:

All abstracts presented at the ISU annual meeting between 2005 and 2011 were identified. The subsequent publication rate following the meetings was established for the corresponding studies based on a Medline scan. A range of characteristics associated with subsequent publication were analysed using the logistic regression of the dichotomous variable of publications vs. non-publication of each factor.

Results:

Overall, 46% of the 322 abstracts presented at the ISU meeting were followed by publication into Medline-indexed journals with a mean impact factor of 2.6. A total of 74% abstracts were published within two years. Oral presentations were more likely to be published than posters ( p < 0.0001), and prospective clinical research was more likely to be published in a journal with a higher impact factor than retrospective analyses ( p = 0.033); the mean time to publication was 16.7 months.

Conclusions:

Almost half the abstracts presented at the ISU were subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals, the majority within two years. This compares favourably with larger urological meetings, and provides an incentive to other smaller countries within Europe to continue with national research programmes.

Abstracts presented at the European Society for Pediatric Urology (ESPU) meetings (2003-2010): characteristics and outcome

OBJECTIVE

To determine the characteristics and outcome of abstracts presented to the meetings of the European Society for Pediatric Urology (ESPU).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Abstract books from 2003 to 2010 were reviewed and subsequent publication of presented abstracts determined by MEDLINE/PubMed search.

RESULTS

Of 1194 abstracts, 50-78% per year originated from 15 to 20 European countries and 50-22% from 8 to 13 non-European countries; 233 (19%) were basic science and 961 (81%) clinical. Clinical abstracts included 135 (14%) multicenter/prospective/randomized trials. These figures did not change significantly over time. A total of 564 (47%) abstracts were subsequently published, 65% within 1 year of the meeting, mostly in the Journal of Urology (33%) and the Journal of Pediatric Urology (21%). Multicenter/prospective/randomized trials studies (OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.37-2.96) and abstracts originating from outside Europe (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.26-2.05) were significantly more likely to be subsequently published in full.

CONCLUSION

The ESPU meetings are a true occasion for international exchange of scientific endeavors. Almost half of the abstracts are subsequently published. The Journal of Urology and the Journal of Pediatric Urology are consistently the two major target journals for publication. Non-European countries, irrespective of whether English-speaking or not, seem significantly more likely to publish their abstracts.

Urological research in sub-Saharan Africa: a retrospective cohort study of abstracts presented at the Nigerian Association of Urological Surgeons conferences

Background

Nigeria is one of the top three countries in Africa in terms of science research output and Nigerian urologists’ biomedical research output contributes to this. Each year, urologists in Nigeria gather to present their recent research at the conference of the Nigerian Association of Urological Surgeons (NAUS). These abstracts are not thoroughly vetted as are full length manuscripts published in peer reviewed journals but the information they disseminate may affect clinical practice of attendees. This study aims to describe the characteristics of abstracts presented at the annual conferences of NAUS, the quality of the abstracts as determined by the subsequent publication of full length manuscripts in peer-review indexed journals and the factors that influence such successful publication.

Methods

Abstracts presented at the 2007 to 2010 NAUS conferences were identified through conference abstracts books. Using a strict search protocol, publication in peer-reviewed journals was determined. The abstracts characteristics were analyzed and their quality judged by subsequent successful publishing of full length manuscripts. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 16.0 software to determine factors predictive of successful publication.

Results

Only 75 abstracts were presented at the NAUS 2007 to 2010 conferences; a quarter (24%) of the presented abstracts was subsequently published as full length manuscripts. Median time to publication was 15 months (range 2–40 months). Manuscripts whose result data were analyzed with ‘beyond basic’ statistics of frequencies and averages were more likely to be published than those with basic or no statistics.

Conclusions

Quality of the abstracts and thus subsequent publication success is influenced by the use of ‘beyond basic’ statistics in analysis of the result data presented. There is a need for improvement in the quality of urological research from Nigeria.

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.

Fate of abstracts presented at the annual meeting of the korean urological association

Purpose

The acceptance rate for journal publication of the abstracts presented at the annual Korean Urological Association (KUA) meeting, the time to publication, and the effect of abstract characteristics on the publication pattern were analyzed and compared with data for abstracts from other major urological meetings.

Materials and Methods

A total of 1,005 abstracts listed in the abstract books of the 2006 (58th) and 2007 (59th) annual KUA meetings were analyzed, and their subsequent publication as listed in PubMed or KoreaMed between August 2006 and August 2011 was evaluated.

Results

A total of 41.59% of abstracts were published as full-length reports. Abstracts on sexual dysfunction, neurourology, prostate cancer, basic research, and benign prostatic hyperplasia showed the highest publication rates (54%, 52.27%, 48%, 47.56%, and 45%, respectively). It took 19.01±12.83 months on average for abstracts to be published in a journal, whereas it took 25.24±14.64 months and 17.51±11.89 months for publication in foreign and Korean journals, respectively (p<0.001).

Conclusions

Approximately 40% of studies presented as abstracts at the KUA meeting are subsequently published as full-length articles. The KJU is the most targeted journal. The mean time to publication is 1.5 years, and publication seems to be influenced by the study subject.

Analysis of abstracts presented at the prosthodontic research section of IADR General Sessions 2004-2005: demographics, publication rates, and factors contributing to publication

PURPOSE

The purposes of this study were to describe the demographics of abstracts presented at the prosthodontics section of IADR General Sessions from 2004 to 2005, evaluate the publication rate of abstracts, and analyze the relationship between variables in abstracts and publication.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prosthodontics research section abstracts from the IADR General Session in 2004 and 2005 were evaluated for: number of authors, presentation type, origin, affiliation, topic, study design, statistics, study outcome, and funding. The publication rate was calculated following a PubMed search. The journal of publication, year of publication, and the length of time before publication were analyzed. Descriptive statistics were used for the data analysis; the relationships between presentation type, study design, study outcome, statistics, funding, and publication were analyzed using logistic regression (α= 0.05).

RESULTS

From 346 abstracts, 37.0% were published. For oral presentations, 40.7% were published; 35.8% of poster presentations were published. The mean duration before publication was 26.4 months. North America had the most abstracts, and Europe had the most publications. Fixed prosthodontic research had the highest number and proportion for publication. A significant association with publication was noted for neutral study outcomes (p= 0.018), studies with funding (p= 0.035), and abstracts from Europe (p= 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of abstracts from the prosthodontics research section of IADR General Sessions from 2004 and 2005 remain unpublished. A significant association for publication was noted with neutral outcomes, funding, and abstracts from Europe.

Publication patterns of oral and poster presentations at the annual meetings of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons

OBJECT

National and international meetings, such as the Congress of Neurological Surgeons (CNS) and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) meetings, provide a central location for the gathering and dissemination of research. The purpose of this study was to determine the publication rates of both oral and poster presentations at CNS and AANS meetings in peer-reviewed journals.

METHODS

The authors reviewed all accepted abstracts, presented as either oral or poster presentations, at the CNS and AANS meetings from 2003 to 2005. This information was then used to search PubMed to determine the rate of publication of the abstracts presented at the meetings. Abstracts were considered published if the data presented at the meeting was identical to that in the publication.

RESULTS

The overall publication rate was 32.48% (1243 of 3827 abstracts). On average, 41.28% of oral presentations and 29.03% of poster presentations were eventually published. Of those studies eventually published, 98.71% were published within 5 years of presentation at the meeting. Published abstracts were published most frequently in the Journal of Neurosurgery and Neurosurgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-third of all presentations at the annual CNS and AANS meetings will be published in peer-reviewed, MEDLINE-indexed journals. These meetings are excellent forums for neurosurgical practitioners to be exposed to current research. Oral presentations have a significantly higher rate of eventual publication compared with poster presentations, reflecting their higher quality. The Journal of Neurosurgery and Neurosurgery have been the main outlets of neurosurgical research from these meetings.

An analysis of abstracts presented to the college on problems of drug dependence meeting and subsequent publication in peer review journals

Background

Subsequent publication rate of abstracts presented at meetings is seen as an indicator of the interest and quality of the meeting. We have analyzed characteristics and rate publication in peer-reviewed journals derived from oral communications and posters presented at the 1999 College on Problems of Drug Dependence (CPDD) meeting.

Methods

All 689 abstracts presented at the 1999 CPDD meeting were reviewed. In order to find the existence of publications derived from abstracts presented at that meeting, a set of bibliographical searches in the database Medline was developed in July 2006. Information was gathered concerning the abstracts, articles and journals in which they were published.

Results

254 out of 689 abstracts (36.9%) gave rise to at least one publication. The oral communications had a greater likelihood of being published than did the posters (OR = 2.53, 95% CI 1.80-3.55). The average time lapse to publication of an article was 672.97 days. The number of authors per work in the subsequent publications was 4.55. The articles were published in a total of 84 journals, of which eight were indexed with the subject term Substance-Related Disorders. Psychopharmacology (37 articles, 14.5%) was the journal that published the greatest number of articles subsequent to the abstracts presented at the 1999 CPDD meeting.

Conclusion

One out of every three abstracts presented to the 1999 CPDD meeting were later published in peer-reviewed journals indexed in Medline. The subsequent publication of the abstracts presented in the CPDD meetings should be actively encouraged, as this maximizes the dissemination of the scientific research and therefore the investment.

[Publication rate for oral presentations made at the Journées Dermatologiques de Paris meeting]

BACKGROUND

The fate of oral presentations presented at a dermatological meeting has not been assessed to date. Our aim was to determine the publication rate for oral presentations presented at the "Journées dermatologiques de Paris" (JDP) meeting in peer-reviewed journals. Our secondary goals were to identify factors associated with publication and to examine the consistency of reporting of research findings presented in the conference abstract and subsequent full publication.

METHODS

Abstracts presented orally at the JDP 1999-2004 were identified in the book of congress abstracts. Two independent operatives performed a Medline search cross-referencing lead and last authors and keywords.

RESULTS

The publication rate was 57.6% with mean time to publication of 20.3months. The median impact factor was 2.8. Factors associated with subsequent publication were study topic (p=0.04 for oncology) and study type (p=0.03 for fundamental research and p=0.005 for randomized controlled trials). The congress abstracts and full-text publication differed primarily in terms of sample size and data given in the "Results" section.

DISCUSSION

More than half of all abstracts presented orally at the JDP congress are subsequently published in journals with a median impact factor comparable to those seen for other scientific congresses for which similar analysis has been conducted. These results confirm the scientific quality of this particular congress, in addition to its vocation of continuous medical training.

[What is the publication rate of papers presented at the French Association of Urology annual conferences?]

The meeting of the French Association of Urology (AFU) occurs once a year. Some communications are consequently published in national or international journals. We analysed the criteria of publication of works communicated during the AFU meeting.

MATERIAL

We analysed all the communications of the 94th and the 95th meeting of AFU from years 2000 and 2001, identified from the Progrès en urologie supplements. We then asked Medline covering a period of time from January 1996 to December 2006 and then compared communications to similar published articles.

RESULTS

The overall publication rate was 34.5%. Articles (38.6%) were published the year following the meeting but the main articles were published the following 2 years after the meeting (78.42%). The mean time for publication was 16.9months. The prospective studies had a publication rate of 44.1% versus 24.8% for retrospective studies. One article over five was published in Progrès en urologie (21.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Only one third of communications of the French meeting of urology was then published. Twenty percent were published in Progrès en urologie. Different way could increase the publication rate. The time for publication, higher for this meeting than for others, may decrease with the new submission website.