Fate of abstracts presented at the World Congress of Endourology: are they followed by publication in peer-reviewed journals?

A multicenter study on the application of artificial intelligence radiological characteristics to predict prognosis after percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Background

A model to predict preoperative outcomes after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) with renal staghorn stones is developed to be an essential preoperative consultation tool.

Objective

In this study, we constructed a predictive model for one-time stone clearance after PCNL for renal staghorn calculi, so as to predict the stone clearance rate of patients in one operation, and provide a reference direction for patients and clinicians.

Methods

According to the 175 patients with renal staghorn stones undergoing PCNL at two centers, preoperative/postoperative variables were collected. After identifying characteristic variables using PCA analysis to avoid overfitting. A predictive model was developed for preoperative outcomes after PCNL in patients with renal staghorn stones. In addition, we repeatedly cross-validated their model's predictive efficacy and clinical application using data from two different centers.

Results

The study included 175 patients from two centers treated with PCNL. We used a training set and an external validation set. Radionics characteristics, deep migration learning, clinical characteristics, and DTL+Rad-signature were successfully constructed using machine learning based on patients' pre/postoperative imaging characteristics and clinical variables using minimum absolute shrinkage and selection operator algorithms. In this study, DTL-Rad signal was found to be the outstanding predictor of stone clearance in patients with renal deer antler-like stones treated by PCNL. The DTL+Rad signature showed good discriminatory ability in both the training and external validation groups with AUC values of 0.871 (95% CI, 0.800-0.942) and 0.744 (95% CI, 0.617-0.871). The decision curve demonstrated the radiographic model's clinical utility and illustrated specificities of 0.935 and 0.806, respectively.

Conclusion

We found a prediction model combining imaging characteristics, neural networks, and clinical characteristics can be used as an effective preoperative prediction method.

Publication dynamics: what can be done to eliminate barriers to publishing full manuscripts by the postgraduate trainees of a low-middle income country?

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine the publication rate of free paper abstracts presented by the postgraduate (PG) trainees and determine the reasons for non-publication. A mixed methods study was conducted. PG trainees presenting free papers at the at the Pakistan Society of Chemical Pathologist conferences from 2012 to 2018 were included. Three databases were searched to identify if the abstracts were published or not. The PG trainee authors of abstracts not published as full manuscript, were surveyed to determine the barriers and challenges in publishing a manuscript.

RESULTS

The average rate of full manuscript publication was 51.8% (n = 93/177) for the abstracts presented by the PG trainees. Publication rate was higher for oral (n = 73/119, 61.3%) compared to poster presentation (n = 20/58, 34.5%). Most of the manuscripts were published after two years of abstract presentation. The survey showed that the main challenges to publishing an abstract were lack of time, limited scientific writing or submission skills, lack of funding for publication fee, and negative or statistically non-significant results. This reflects a need to arrange workshops/symposia for the PG trainees of low-middle income country (LMIC) to enhance their writing and time management skills and improve the full manuscript publication rate from LMICs.

Publication rates of abstracts presented at the annual scientific meetings held by the American Academy of Forensic Sciences in 2011 and 2016

Prior research evaluating the papers presented in forensic sciences in international meetings is scant. This study determines the possible predictions concerning publications by comparing the publication rates, publication years, and presentation types, time until publication, participating countries, and criteria of the published journals in the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS). The publication rates of abstracts presented at scientific meetings of AAFS, a prestigious forensic science organization, along with the aforementioned components and the extent of their contribution in 2011 and 2016 were investigated. The abstracts presented at the AAFS meetings in 2011 and 2016 were reviewed retrospectively within the scope of this study. The Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases were searched using a specified process that included the title, first and last author surnames, and keywords. Results revealed that approximately 21% and 24% of the papers presented at the 2011 and 2016 AAFS meetings, respectively, were published. Considering the publication rates of abstracts according to sections, the publication rates for the 2011 AAFS meeting ranged from 4% (questioned documents) to 31% (anthropology) and from 5% (questioned documents) to 32% (pathology/biology), on average, for the 2016 AAFS meeting. It was determined that the papers were largely published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences for both annual scientific meetings. Future studies should concentrate on the obstacles to the publication of papers presented at such prestigious organizations and strategies to facilitate the publication process such that they do not lose their value over time.

Conference abstracts-what gets published, when, and from where?

BACKGROUND

Scientific meetings provide a platform for disseminating new research. Abstracts presented at these meetings are frequently published as full-length papers in peer-reviewed journals. The primary aims of this study were to determine the publication rate and time to publication of abstracts presented at the European Orthodontic Society (EOS) and World Federation of Orthodontists (WFO) congresses in 2015. The secondary aim was to identify factors predicting the publication of abstracts.

METHODS

The congress abstracts were identified from the congress report or organizers. Systematic searches of the PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were performed to identify papers based on the abstracts identified. Abstract titles, first and last authors' last name, and keywords were used to identify whether an abstract resulted in a publication. Abstracts published as full-length articles were then analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 208 abstracts were identified, of which 46.6% were published as full-length articles. The median time to publication was 17 months after the EOS congress, and 8.5 months after the WFO congress. Abstracts presented orally were more likely to be published than those presented as posters. Abstracts from Europe were more likely to result in publication. The subject and setting of the study were poor predictors of publication.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than half of the abstracts presented at the EOS and WFO congresses in 2015 led to full publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The mode of presentation and the region of origin of the research were good predictors of publication.

[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.

Evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Clinical studies assessing the feasibility and accuracy of three stone scoring systems’s (SSSs: Guy’s stone score, CROES nomogram and S.T.O.N.E nephrolithometry scoring system) have reported contradictory outcomes. This systematic evaluation was performed to obtain comprehensive evidence with regard to the feasibility and accuracy of three SSSs.

Methods

A systematic search of Embase, Pubmed, Medline, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify studies that compared three SSSs up to Mar 2018. Patients were categorized according to stone free (SF) and no-stone free (NSF), Outcomes of interest included perioperative variables, stone-free rate (SFR), and complications.

Results

Ten studies estimating three SSSs were included for meta-analysis. The results showed that SF patients had a significantly lower proportion of male (OR = 1.48, P = 0.0007), lower stone burden (WMD = -504.28, P < 0.0001), fewer No of involved calyces (OR = -1.23, P = 0.0007) and lower proportion of staghorn stone (OR = 0.33, P < 0.0001). Moreover, SF patients had significantly lower score of Guy score (WMD = -0.64, P < 0.0001), but, S.T.O.N.E. score (WMD = -1.23, P < 0.0001) and a higher score of CROES nomogram (WMD = 29.48, P = 0.003). However, the comparison of area under curves (AUC) of predicting SFR indicated that there was no remarkable difference between three SSSs. Nonetheless, Guy score was the only stone scoring system that predicted complications after PCNL (WMD = -0.29, 95% CI: − 0.57 to − 0.02, P = 0.03).

Conclusions

Our meta-analysis indicated that the three SSSs were equally, feasible and accurate for predicting SFR after PCNL. However, Guy score was the only stone scoring system that predicted complications after PCNL.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12894-019-0488-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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 outcome of abstracts submitted to the American Academy of Ophthalmology meeting

Objective

Abstracts submitted to meetings are subject to less rigorous peer review than full-text manuscripts. This study aimed to explore the publication outcome of abstracts presented at the American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) annual meeting.

Methods

Abstracts presented at the 2008 AAO meeting were analyzed. Each presented abstract was sought via PubMed to identify if it had been published as a full-text manuscript. The publication outcome, journal impact factor (IF), and time to publication were recorded.

Results

A total of 690 abstracts were reviewed, of which 39.1% were subsequently published. They were published in journals with a median IF of 2.9 (range 0–7.2) and a median publication time of 426 days (range 0–2,133 days). A quarter were published in the journal Ophthalmology, with a shorter time to publication (median 282 vs. 534 days, p=0.003). Oral presentations were more likely to be published than poster presentations (57.8% vs. 35.9%, p<0.001) and in journals with higher IFs (3.2 vs. 2.8, p=0.02). Abstracts describing rare diseases had higher publication rates (49.4% vs. 38.0%, p=0.04) and were published in higher IF journals (3.7 vs. 2.9, p=0.03), within a shorter period of time (358 vs. 428 days, p=0.03). In multivariate analysis, affiliation with an institute located in the United States (p=0.002), abstracts describing rare diseases (p=0.03), and funded studies (p=0.03) were associated with publication in higher IF journals.

Conclusions

Almost 40% of abstracts were published. Factors that correlated with publication in journals with higher IF were a focus on rare diseases, affiliation with a US institute, and funding.

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.

Publication rate of abstracts presented at the British Association of Urological Surgeons Annual Meeting – 10 years on

Introduction:

Acceptance of abstracts at the BAUS Annual Meeting is sought after by trainees and encouraged by trainers; however, it is the publication of this research in a peer-reviewed journal that validates the significance of the work. We aimed to compare current publication rates with those detailed in a previous study 10 years ago to examine for changes on the rate and time to peer-reviewed publications of abstracts presented. We also assessed whether there was a difference in the presentation and publication rates between UK deaneries.

Methods:

All abstracts accepted for presentation at the annual BAUS 2012 and 2013 meetings were identified from the published supplements in the BJU International journal. Listed abstracts were searched for in October 2015 using the Medline Plus (PubMed) database to assess for successful conversion to a peer-reviewed paper listed on the Medline database.

Results:

In total 281 abstracts were presented; of these, 265 (94.3%) were from the UK. A total of 24.2% of the abstracts presented over the two-year period resulted in a successful conversion to a peer-reviewed publication. Mean time to publication was 11.59 months and mean impact factor of the publishing journal was 3.854. There appeared to be no correlation between the number of abstracts presented per deanery and the subsequent successful conversion to peer-reviewed publication.

Conclusions:

There has been a decline over the past decade in the number of BAUS abstracts being successfully converted into peer-reviewed publications, from 42% to 24.2%. The quality of any scientific meeting can be quantified by the number of peer-reviewed publications arising from its abstracts. Possible reasons for this observed reduction include a lack of time to prepare manuscripts, the actual quality and relevance of work being presented and data that may be of questionable validity. In addition, indicative numbers set for publications to enable successful awarding of Certificate of Completion of Training are low.

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.

[Abstracts at congresses of the German Society of Urology. Trends and quality]

BACKGROUND

The congress of the German Society of Urology is the third biggest urology congress worldwide and reflects the scientific landscape of urology in Germany. In the congress abstracts, detailed data regarding study design, current trends in urologic research and the cooperation of authors are lacking. We wanted to identify factors contributing to the likelihood of an abstract being followed by a publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The two congresses of the years 2002 and 2009 were exemplarily analyzed. Various aspects regarding study design and cooperations were retrieved from the abstracts and trends were determined. Subsequent publications in peer-reviewed journals were searched for in MEDLINE and potential factors influencing publication success were identified. Significance was tested for using the χ (2) and Mann-Whitney-U statistical tests.

RESULTS

A total of 732 abstracts (2002: 352, 2009: 380) were analyzed, one third of which contained prospective, retrospective or preclinical/experimental studies. Internal (28.7 %) and national (27.6 %) cooperations were most frequent. Significant trends towards more retrospective studies (p=0.008) and national cooperations (p=0.019) were found. Of the abstracts 49.2 % (2002) and 56.3% (2009) were followed by publication in peer-reviewed journals (median 15.1 months) with a significantly higher mean impact factor in 2009 (3.4 vs. 2.1, respectively p>0.0001). Therapeutic studies and those including statistics or national cooperations were significantly more likely to be published.

CONCLUSION

In the future urologic research should focus on prospective studies. Many abstracts are not followed by a publication in a peer-reviewed journal. This is especially true for abstracts containing no statistics. As national collaborations are correlated with successful publication, an early national networking of young researching urologists should be promoted.

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.

Fate of abstracts presented at the 2004-2008 International Liver Transplantation Society meetings

Only 20.5% to 61.6% of abstracts presented at biomedical meetings are subsequently published as full-length articles. The aim of this study was to analyze the abstract-to-publication rate of International Liver Transplantation Society (ILTS) meeting abstracts. Abstracts presented at 5 consecutive annual ILTS meetings (2004-2008) were included to ensure a minimum follow-up period of 4 years. For each abstract, a PubMed Central search was conducted with the first author's name and affiliation along with keywords from the title. The following abstract characteristics were examined and used to obtain the abstract-to-publication rate: (1) the year of presentation, (2) the presentation category (plenary session, concurrent oral presentation, or poster presentation), (3) the type of study (randomized clinical study, case report, other clinical study, or basic science study), (4) the first author's discipline (surgery, medicine, anesthesiology/critical care medicine, pathology, radiology, or pharmacology), and (5) the location of the authors (ie, an English-speaking or non-English-speaking country). A total of 2345 abstracts (469 ± 144 abstracts per meeting) were presented, and 913 of those abstracts (38.9%) were expanded into full-length publications. It took 46 months for 90% of the abstracts to be published as full-length journal articles. The abstract-to-publication rates differed with the year of abstract presentation (50.2% in 2004, 45.9% in 2005, 47.6% in 2006, 30.6% in 2007, and 30.3% in 2008; P < 0.001), with the presentation category (49.6% for plenary sessions, 48.5% for concurrent oral presentations, and 34.8% for poster presentations; P < 0.001), and with the type of study (66.7% for randomized clinical studies, 63.1% for basic science studies, 36.7% for other clinical studies, and 35.0% for case reports; P < 0.001). Abstracts from authors from non-English-speaking countries had a higher publication rate (41.1% versus 33.6%, P < 0.001). No differences were found between first authors' disciplines.

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.

Canadian urology resident scholarly performance

INTRODUCTION

Scholarly research is a key component of Canadian urology residency. Through comparison of scholarly performance of urology residents before residency with that achieved during residency, we aimed to elicit predictive factors for completion of research activities.

METHODS

Electronic surveys were sent to 152 urology residents of 11 accredited Canadian programs. Survey questions pertained to post-graduate training year (PGY), formal education, scholarly activity completed before and after the start of residency, protected/dedicated research time, structured research curriculum and pursuit of fellowship training.

RESULTS

Surveys were completed by 42 residents from 10 programs. Only 26% of residents had a structured research curriculum, 38% a dedicated research rotation and 43% protected research time. We found that 45% of residents published at least 1 manuscript so far during residency (mean 1.14 ± 0.32), and 43% submitted at least 1 manuscript (mean 0.86 ± 0.25). During residency, 62% of residents completed ≥1 formal research presentation (median number 1.5; range: 0-≥10). Only the level of PGY significantly affected the number of manuscripts published (p < 0.001) and number of formal research presentations (p < 0.001) completed during residency. In total, 86% of residents planning to pursue fellowship training had a mean number of publications and presentations during residency of 1.25 ± 0.37 and 2.25 ± 0.54, respectively.

INTERPRETATION

Level of PGY significantly affected quantitative scholarly activity, but the numbers and types of presentations performed prior to residency, completion of an honours or graduate degree and plans to pursue fellowship training did not.

Analysis of publication status of abstracts presented at the annual meeting of the korean academy of rehabilitation medicine

Objective

To analyze publication rate, time to publication and the characteristics of the abstracts presented at the annual Korean Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine (KARM) meetings.

Methods

A total of 1,027 abstracts presented at the 2008 and 2009 annual KARM meetings were enrolled in the database and searched for their subsequent citation in PubMed, KoreaMed, and Google Scholar.

Results

The data analysis revealed that 317 (30.87%) abstracts, were published as full-length journal articles and publication rates by subject were not significantly different. The mean time to publication was 17.17±10.48 months, and the journals written in English (20.39±10.20) required a longer duration than those written in Korean (11.94±8.44) with statistical significance (p<0.001). There was no statistical difference (p=0.284) in the duration between domestic (17.61±10.37) and foreign (16.48±10.51) of the 220 domestic journal articles, 190 (86.76%) were published in the Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine and the 97 articles published in foreign journals were scattered over 60 different journals.

Conclusion

The publication rate of abstracts presented at the 2008 and 2009 annual KARM meetings was 30.87% and the mean time to publication was 17.17±10.48 months.

Publication outcomes of abstracts presented at an American College of Rheumatology/Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals annual scientific meeting

OBJECTIVE

The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and the Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals (ARHP) Annual Scientific Meeting is an important forum for early dissemination of novel ideas. However, unlike published studies in peer-reviewed journals, reviewers select abstracts based solely on a general summary of the research. Analyses of the scientific impact and the publication record of the ACR/ARHP Annual Meeting have not been previously described. This study characterizes publication trends and outcomes associated with abstracts presented at the ACR/ARHP Annual Scientific Meeting.

METHODS

We identified all abstracts accepted for oral or poster presentation at the 2006 ACR/ARHP Annual Scientific Meeting. Using a defined search algorithm, we conducted a manual PubMed search for each accepted abstract, which was repeated by a custom computerized search, and analyzed the resulting journal title, impact factor, and time to publication.

RESULTS

A total of 2,149 abstracts were analyzed. The overall publication ratio was 59.1%. The mean ± SD time from abstract presentation to publication was 18.2 ± 15.2 months with a mean ± SD impact factor of 5.61 ± 4.20. Overall, studies presented in oral format were significantly more likely to be published than poster presentations (P < 0.0001). The average time to publication was significantly shorter for basic science studies than clinical research studies (P < 0.0001). The average journal impact factor of published studies presented in oral format was significantly higher than those presented as posters (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

These results reflect high research productivity with a publication ratio of approximately 60% for abstracts presented at the 2006 Annual Scientific Meeting.

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.

Conversion rates of abstracts presented at the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand (USANZ) Annual Scientific Meeting into full-text journal articles

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? It is well known that the transition of a presented abstract in a scientific meeting to a journal article improves the quality of the meeting and prevents an abstract being incorporated into meta-analyses or practice guidelines without proper appraisal. This is the first analysis of USANZ Annual Scientific Meeting abstracts' conversion to full publication. With relatively low publication rates compared to other international meetings, this review identifies the need for mechanisms to encourage USANZ researchers to convert their abstracts into published articles. The numbers and characteristics of the abstracts presented at the Annual Scientific Meetings (ASM) of the Urological Society of Australia and New Zealand (USANZ) that are converted to peer-reviewed publications have not previously been analysed and published. We undertook a review of all abstracts presented at the USANZ ASM from 2005 to 2009. A PubMed search was performed between 15 June and 15 July 2012, using a search algorithm to identify the full-text publications of the presented abstracts. Correlation between abstract characteristics and publication rate was then examined to distinguish the predictors for publications. Of 614 abstracts that were presented at USANZ ASM between 2005 and 2009, 183 papers were published, giving a publication rate of 29.80%. The papers were predominantly published in urological journals and were more likely to be published if they were presented by an international author or were retrospective studies or if basic science research. The mean (SD) time to publication was 14.46 (13.89) months and the mean Impact Factor of journals where papers were published was 2.90. The overall publication rate was relatively low compared with other urological meetings held in America and Europe. USANZ has a challenge of encouraging higher-quality research from the authors to further enhance its publication rate and consequently the calibre of the meeting itself.

Randomized clinical trials presented at the World Congress of Endourology: how is the quality of reporting?

PURPOSE

To assess the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) presented in abstract form at the annual World Congress of Endourology (WCE) and evaluate their course of subsequent publication.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All RCTs presented in abstract form at the 2004, 2005, and 2006 WCE annual meetings were identified for review. Quality of reporting was assessed by applying a standardized 14-item evaluation tool based on the Consolidated Standards for the Reporting of Trials (CONSORT) statement. The subsequent publication rate for the corresponding studies by scanning Medline was also evaluated. Appropriate statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 94 RCTs (3.5% of 2669) were identified for review: 21 in 2004, 36 in 2005, and 37 in 2006. Overall, 45 (47.3% of the total) were subsequently published as a full length indexed manuscript with a mean time to publication of 16.4 ± 13.2 months. Approximately 61 (60%) identified the study design as RCT in the abstract title. None reported the method of randomization. In studies that reported blinding (seven, 11% of 62), five were double blinded and two single blinded. Adverse events were reported in 38% of cases. Only 10% of the abstracts complied fully with more than 10 items according to our CONSORT-based checklist, whereas the majority of them failed to comply with most of the CONSORT requirements.

CONCLUSIONS

Although representing a small portion of the overall number of abstracts, there has been a steady increase of presentation of RCTs at the WCE over the assessed 3-year period. Most of the time they are recognized as RCTs in the abstract title. When applying the CONSORT criteria, necessary information to assess their methodologic quality is incomplete in some cases.

[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.

The publication rate and impact of abstracts presented at the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (1999-2005)

AIMS

As there is no current information regarding the fate of abstracts presented at annual scientific meetings of the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (CSANZ), we examined the publication rate and indexed impact of original articles arising from these abstracts.

METHODS

Conference abstracts from 1999 to 2005 were evaluated as these were accessible in electronic file form. Searches were conducted for abstract authors and keywords were searched for in journal publication citations (to November 30, 2007) in the National Library of Medicine (NIH, USA) PubMed database. A match of abstract to retrieve full article was identified on the basis of authorship, similarities in titles and study design. The ISI Web of Knowledge citation database (Philadelphia, USA) was accessed for Journal Citation Reports impact factors (IF).

RESULTS

A total of 2172 abstract presentations resulted in 648 original publications (30%, mean IF = 4.4). Most publications were published within 1 (61%) or 2 years (84%), with a mean lag of 1.5 years. The proportions of abstract presentations represented by Clinical, Basic Science and Surgical categories were 70.6%, 26.9%, and 2.5%, respectively. Subsequent publication rates (and IF) arising from within these categories were 25.8% (IF = 4.8), 34.4% (IF = 5.1) and 97.9% (IF = 3.1), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

(1) Almost a third of CSANZ abstract presentations result in publication of an original article. (2) Most are published within 1-2 years. (3) The average IF is mid-range, with 32% of publications having an IF above 4.4. Despite the limitations to publication faced by CSANZ members, a high quality and timely publication rate is nonetheless evident.

[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.

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

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the acceptance rate on peer-reviewed journals, describe the time-course of subsequent full publication, and identify those with characteristics associated with publication from the abstracts presented at the Societè Internationale d'Urologie (SIU) meeting.

METHODS

All abstracts accepted for presentation at the annual 2002 and 2004 SIU meetings were identified from the published supplements in the BJU International. The subsequent publication rate for the corresponding studies by scanning Medline was evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 1877 abstracts were presented, 415 of which (22.1%) were followed by publication in peer-reviewed journals. The mean time to publication was 13 months (range, 1 to 45 months). A total of 60.6% of the published articles were in print within 1 year of presentation "In most of the cases the reports were published in The Journal of Urology (76 reports) and in Urology (49 reports). Abstracts on kidney cancer, urinary diversion, incontinence, and urolithiasis had the highest publication rates (43.4%, 36.6%, 33.3%, and 29.2%, respectively). Studies from North America and from Oceania had the highest publication rate (26.8% and 26.6%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

One fifth of the abstracts presented at the SIU meetings are ultimately published in indexed journals. Delegates attending these meetings should be aware of this issue when taking into account findings from meeting reports for their clinical practice. Factors influencing their publication are the abstract geographical area of origin, the study subject, and the research type. The Journal of Urology and Urology represented target journals for the publication more than other ones.

Study characteristics of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the southeastern section of the American Urological Association (1996-2005)

PURPOSE

We determined study characteristics, authorship and institutional origin of studies presented in abstract form at the Southeastern Section of the American Urological Association annual meetings and identified predictors of full text publication.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All abstracts of poster and podium presentations from the Southeastern Section of the American Urological Association annual meetings from 1996 to 2005 were reviewed. A standardized evaluation form was developed and tested in 2 subsets of 50 abstracts, and then applied by 2 individual reviewers with specific coding instructions. Predictor variables analyzed included study origin, design, topic, domain, presentation form, number of patients, reporting of statistical analysis and gender. Univariate and multivariate analysis was applied using SPSS version 14.0.

RESULTS

A total of 1,195 abstracts were found eligible for review. The mean number of abstracts presented per year was 120 +/- 16 (range 107 to 146). In clinical studies (1,068) approximately three-quarters of the abstracts reported case series (801, 75.0%). Cohort studies accounted for 11.2% of the abstracts and 4.0% were randomized controlled trials or systematic reviews/meta-analyses. Median followup was 64 months (range 17 to 126) and the overall publication rate was 33.5%. First and senior female authorship were identified in 6.2% (74) and 5.4% (64) of abstracts presented, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A majority of studies presented at the Southeastern Section of the American Urological Association annual meetings continue to represent small case series that may not be well suited to guide clinical decision making. Only a third of studies are subsequently published in the peer reviewed literature. The percentage of abstracts with female authorship remains low suggesting that increased efforts to involve women in urological research are indicated.