Does presentation format at the Pediatric Academic Societies' annual meeting predict subsequent publication?

Getting it Across the Finish Line - Publication Rates of Abstracts Presented at a Major Urologic Conference

OBJECTIVE

To identify characteristics of published manuscripts following a regional American Urological Association (AUA) meeting and recognize trends of publication rates over a 13-year timeframe.

METHODS

Abstract submissions to the Mid-Atlantic AUA (MA-AUA) conference from 2008 to 2020 were collected. Manuscripts were searched using abstract titles and authors in a standard fashion using PubMed, Google Scholar, and Google. Characteristic data was collected, including abstract type (podium or poster), abstract category, first author gender, manuscript publication date, and journal of publication. Univariate and multivariate analysis determined association of these variables with manuscript publication.

RESULTS

1257 abstracts were presented between 2008 and 2020, of which 458 (36%) were published as manuscripts and 799 (64%) were not published. Of the published manuscripts, 55 (12%) were published prior to the conference date and 403 (88%) were published after. Our analysis was limited to the 403 manuscripts published post-meeting and the 799 abstracts that were not published, with N=1202. Amongst the 403 published post-meeting, the mean time to publication was 14.8 months ± 13.2 months. Podium presentations had a higher proportion of publications than those of posters (39.4% vs 30.5%, p=0.002). There was a statistically significant difference in proportion of publications between years (p=0.002). No association was noted between abstract first author gender and publication (38.7% male vs. 39.2% female, p=0.899).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-third of presented abstracts from a major urologic conference were published with an average time to publication of 15 months. Publication percentage varied significantly between different years. Podium presentations had a higher publication rate compared to non-podium abstracts.

A cross-sectional analysis of publication of pediatric global health abstracts from seven major international conferences

Research presented at conferences may increase context-specific evidence in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where global childhood disease burden is greatest and where massive relative deficits in research persist. Publication of studies presented at conferences is necessary for complete results dissemination. Our objective was to determine the frequency of publication of pediatric global health conference abstracts and to identify factors associated with publication. We conducted a cross-sectional study of abstracts that reported pediatric research conducted in at least one LMIC presented at seven major scientific conferences in 2017, 2018, and 2019. We used PubMed, EMBASE and Google Scholar to search for publications of the results presented as abstracts. We created a Kaplan-Meier curve to determine the cumulative incidence of publications and used predetermined abstract-level factors to create a multivariable Cox proportional hazard model to identify factors associated with time to publication. There were 8,105 abstracts reviewed and 1,433 (17.7%) reported pediatric research conducted in one or more LMICs. The probability of publication of pediatric global health abstracts was 33.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 31.2-36.1%) at 24 months and 46.6% (95% CI 44.0-49.3%) at 48 months. Abstracts that reported research conducted in East Asia and Pacific (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 3.06, 95% CI 1.74-5.24), South Asia (aHR 2.25, 95% CI 1.30-3.91%), and upper-middle-income countries (1.50, 95% CI 1.12-2.02) were published sooner than those that reported research in LMICs in Europe and Central Asia and lower-middle-income countries, respectively. Fewer than half of pediatric global health abstracts were published in peer-reviewed journals up to four years after presentation at international conferences. Efforts are urgently needed to promote the widespread and long-lasting dissemination of pediatric research conducted in LMICs presented as abstracts to provide a more robust evidence base for both clinical care and policy related to child health.

Reviewer Feedback for Abstract Submissions to the Pediatric Academic Societies Meeting: A Pilot Project

PURPOSE

To describe and evaluate a pilot project to provide reviewer comments to authors who submitted abstracts to the Hospital-based medicine topic area for the Pediatric Academic Societies (PAS) 2021 annual meeting METHODS: Abstract reviewers were encouraged via email to include reviewer comments for authors in their abstract reviews. Unedited comments were emailed to authors shortly after the abstract decision notifications were sent. We quantified the number of reviewers who commented per abstract. Additionally, we surveyed authors and reviewers to evaluate the perceived impact of the pilot project.

RESULTS

For 123 abstracts submitted to the Hospital-based medicine topic area, every abstract received comments from at least one reviewer, and a median (IQR) of 4 (3-5) reviewers commented per abstract. The response rates for the author and reviewer surveys were 61/114 (54%) and 54/84 (64%), respectively, and both groups of respondents generally favored the pilot program. The majority of authors (59%) made changes to their project based on the feedback provided and 96% reported that they would like to continue to receive reviewer feedback for future PAS abstract submissions. Reviewers reported spending a mean of 11 minutes reviewing each abstract. Most (85%) felt that they spent the same or slightly more (1%-25%) time reviewing than in prior years. Multiple open-ended comments were provided, largely positive.

CONCLUSION

A pilot program to incorporate reviewer feedback into abstract decision notification for a large national research meeting was successful. This approach should be considered for future meetings to enhance this integral component of academic development.

Charting the course from abstract to published article

OBJECTIVE

Abstracts act as short, efficient sources of new information. This intentional brevity potentially diminishes scientific reliability of described findings. The authors' objective was to 1) determine the proportion of abstracts submitted to the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) annual meeting that subsequently are published in peer-reviewed journals, 2) assess AANS abstract publications for publication bias, and 3) assess AANS abstract publications for differing results.

METHODS

The authors screened all abstracts from the annual 2012 AANS meeting and identified their corresponding full-text publication, if applicable, by searching PubMed/MEDLINE. The abstract and subsequent publication were analyzed for result type (positive or negative) and differences in results.

RESULTS

Overall, 49.3% of abstracts were published as papers. Many (18.1%) of these published papers differed in message from their original abstract. Publication bias exists, with positive abstracts being 40% more likely to be published than negative abstracts. The top journals in which the full-text articles were published were Journal of Neurosurgery (13.1%), Neurosurgery (7.3%), and World Neurosurgery (5.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Here, the authors demonstrate that alone, abstracts are not reliable sources of information. Many abstracts ultimately remain unpublished; therefore, they do not attain a level of scientific scrutiny that merits alteration of clinical care. Furthermore, many that are published have differing results or conclusions. In addition, positive publication bias exists, as positive abstracts are more likely to be published than negative abstracts.

Abstract to publication conversion in pediatric critical care medicine in Pakistan

Background

To determine the rate of conversion of abstracts presented at conferences into full-text articles published in peer-reviewed journals in the field of pediatric critical care medicine (PCCM) in a developing country.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed PCCM abstracts from Pakistan presented at national and international pediatric and critical care conferences over 10 years (January 2010 to March 2020). Data included abstract characteristics, such as presentation (poster/oral), presenter (fellow/resident), time of meeting (month and year), type of meeting, study design and topic; and publication characteristics, such as journal name, time (month and year) and first author. The primary outcome was publication rate of PCCM abstracts presented in meetings and time (months) from presentation to publication.

Results

A total of 79 PCCM abstracts were presented in 20 meetings during the study period. There were 65 poster presentations (82.28%), of which 63 (79.74%) were presented at international critical care conferences and all presenters were PCCM fellows. In total, 64 (81%) abstracts were descriptive observational studies (retrospective: 50, 63.29%) and prospective (14, 17.72%). Only one was an interventional randomized controlled trial. The publication rate of PCCM abstracts was 63.3% (50/79) and the mean time to publication was 12.39±13.61 months. The publication rate was significantly correlated to the year of publication (P<0.001).

Conclusions

The PCCM abstract publication rate and mean time from presentation to publication was 63.3% and 12.39±13.61 months, respectively, in a developing country.

Diversity and Inclusion in the Epidemiology Workforce

Increasing participation by promoting diversity and inclusion in professional society membership has become an important topic for many scientific fields. In a recent issue of the Journal, DeVilbiss et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2020;189(10):998-1010) reported results from a survey conducted by the Society for Epidemiologic Research (SER) Diversity and Inclusion Committee by which several aspects of participation by sociodemographic and cultural variables among its members were measured. Here, we summarize the major findings of the survey, put the authors' results within the greater context of the epidemiology workforce, and provide suggestions on how the Committee could expand its influence by considering measuring variables related to career outcomes and trajectories. This suggestion is based on an attempt to link the interventions being facilitated by SER, the participation indices it is trying to improve, and the greater mission of SER to build sustainable career trajectories that produce the best science that will improve the health of human populations.

Publication of abstracts presented at the Irish Paediatric Association conference

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

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.

Fate of abstracts presented at the Turkish Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (TAOMS) meetings between 2007 and 2009

Objectives

The aim of this study was to determine the rate of peer-reviewed publication of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the Turkish Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (TAOMS) and to identify the time to publication, subspecialty, and study design.

Materials and Methods

All abstracts accepted for presentation at a TAOMS meeting between 2007 and 2009 were identified from a book of abstracts and were searched for publication using PubMed and Google Scholar. The following variables were evaluated: publication rate, type of presentation (oral or poster), time to publication, subspecialty, study design, and name of the journal in which the article was published.

Results

A total of 478 abstracts were presented at the TAOMS meetings between 2007 and 2009. Of these, 140 abstracts (29.3%) were subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals, including 38.2% of oral presentations and 26.6% of poster presentations. The mean time from presentation to publication was 22 months. Regarding publication fields, research and emerging technologies presentations had the highest publication rate (100%). With regard to study type, animal study (70.0%) and basic research (55.0%) had the highest publication rates.

Conclusion

Only 29.3% of abstracts presented at the TAOMS meeting were subsequently published as full-text articles. This rate was found to be similar to the previously reported publication rates in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

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

Objective

This study aimed to determine the publication rate of oral and poster abstracts presented at the 2010 and 2011 Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) conferences as well as the journals that most commonly published these studies, their 5-year impact factor, the time to publication, and the reasons for nonpublication.

Methods

Abstracts presented at the 2010-2011 SGO conferences were included in this study. We searched Google, Google Scholar, and PubMed to locate published reports of these abstracts. If an abstract's full-text manuscript could not be located, an author of the conference abstract was contacted via email to inquire whether the research was published. If the research was unpublished, the authors were asked to provide the reason for nonpublication. The time to publication, journal, and journal impact factor were noted for abstracts that reached full-text publication.

Results

A total of 725 abstracts were identified, of which 386 (53%) reached publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Oral presentations were published at a higher rate than poster presentations. Most (70%) reached publication within 2 years of abstract presentation. Abstracts were published in 89 journals, but most (39%) were published in Gynecologic Oncology. The mean time to publication was 15.7 months, with a mean 5-year impact factor of 4.956.

Conclusions

A 53% publication rate indicates that the SGO conference selection process favors research likely to be published and, thus, presumably of high quality. The overall publication rate is higher than that reported for many other biomedical conferences.

The Pipeline From Abstract Presentation to Publication in Pediatric Hospital Medicine

BACKGROUND

The annual Pediatric Hospital Medicine (PHM) conference serves as a venue for the dissemination of research in this rapidly growing discipline. A measure of research validity is subsequent publication in peer-reviewed journals.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the publication rate of abstracts submitted to the 2014 PHM conference and determine whether presentation format was associated with subsequent journal publication or time to publication.

METHODS

We identified abstracts submitted to the 2014 PHM conference. Presentation formats included rejected abstracts and poster and oral presentations. Abstracts subsequently published in journals were identified by searching the author and abstract title in PubMed, MedEdPORTAL, and Google Scholar. We used logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models to determine if presentation format was associated with publication, time to publication, and publishing journal impact factor.

RESULTS

Of 226 submitted abstracts, 19.0% were rejected, 68.0% were selected for posters, and 12.8% were selected for oral presentations; 36.3% were subsequently published within 30 months after the conference. Abstracts accepted for oral presentation had more than 7-fold greater odds of publication (adjusted odds ratio 7.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-23.5) and a 4-fold greater likelihood of publication at each month (adjusted hazard ratio 4.5; 95% CI, 2.1-9.7) compared with rejected abstracts. Median journal impact factor was significantly higher for oral presentations than other presentation formats (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Abstract reviewers may be able to identify methodologically sound studies for presentation; however, the low overall publication rate may indicate that presented results are preliminary or signify a need for increased mentorship and resources for research development in PHM.

Outcome of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine Abstracts Presented at North American Academic National Meetings

OBJECTIVES

Pediatric critical care medicine abstracts presented at North American national academic meetings have not been followed up to determine their publication outcomes. Our objective was to determine the following: 1) the proportion of these presentations that are published in peer-reviewed journals within 5 years; 2) the impact of trainee status on time to and success of publication; and 3) the quality of the research as reflected in the publishing journal's impact factor.

DESIGN

Four years of abstracts (2007-2011) were reviewed from the American Academy of Pediatrics, Pediatric Academic Societies, and Society of Critical Care Medicine national meetings. Pediatric critical care medicine abstracts were delineated by the meeting or identified by keyword search. Data included mode of presentation, trainee status of first author, publication status within 5 years based on a PubMed search, trainee position in the journal of publication authorship list, and the impact factor of journal of publication.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We evaluated 267 pediatric critical care medicine abstracts, 85-94 from each meeting. Overall, 41% were published, with the highest rate in Pediatric Academic Societies abstracts (54% Pediatric Academic Societies, 38% Society of Critical Care Medicine, and 33% American Academy of Pediatrics; p = 0.011). Mean time to publication was 22 (± 3) months and did not differ by conference or presentation mode. Journal first authorship was retained in 84%. Journal impact factor was highest in Society of Critical Care Medicine abstracts (3.38 Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2.64 Pediatric Academic Societies, and 1.92 American Academy of Pediatrics; p = 0.006). First author trainee status was not associated with publication rate, time to publication, and impact factor. A total of 100% of trainees but only 79% of nontrainees who published retained first authorship.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than half of pediatric critical care medicine research abstracts presented at North American national academic meetings culminate in articles. Pediatric Academic Societies had the highest publication success rate, and Society of Critical Care Medicine abstracts were published in journals with the highest impact factors. All trainees who were first authors retained that status in the journal publications.

Publication outcomes of neonatology abstracts presented at the Pediatric Academic Societies meeting

OBJECTIVE

To examine publication outcomes of neonatology abstracts presented at Pediatric Academic Society (PAS) meeting, and to analyze variables affecting publication.

STUDY DESIGN

All neonatology studies accepted for presentation (oral or poster) at 2008 PAS meeting were identified. A biphasic manual PubMed search of published articles was performed using a pre-designed algorithm.

RESULTS

A total of 1078 neonatology abstracts were presented at the meeting, among them 481 (44.62%) published by 2016. Abstracts presented orally versus posters (56.11 versus 42.32%; P<0.001) and basic science versus clinical abstracts (53.08 versus 40.2%; P<0.001) were more likely to be published. Positive or negative results of a study or its sample size did not predict rates of publication.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than half of the abstracts presented at the PAS meeting were published within 8 years. Oral presentations were more likely to be published than posters.Journal of Perinatology advance online publication, 6 April 2017; doi:10.1038/jp.2017.46.

Society of Gynecologic Investigation: What Gets Published?

OBJECTIVE

To compare publication rates of the plenary slide presentations (plenary), concurrent slide presentations (concurrent), and poster presentations (poster) at Society for Gynecologic Investigation (SGI) meetings for the interval 1990 to 1999.

METHODS

The SGI program and abstract books for years 1990-1999 were examined, with all plenary and twice the number of randomly selected concurrent and poster abstracts identified. For each abstract, PUBMED was used to search for authors and subject topics, if needed. Rates of publication in various journals were compared: group 1: weekly general journals (New England Journal of Medicine [NEJM], Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA], Nature); group 2: monthly obstetrics/gynecology journals (American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Obstetrics and Gynecology); and group 3: other journals (Placenta, Journal of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Fertility and Sterility, etc). Factors predicting ultimate publication were assessed by multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

Over the 10-year period, 75% of the plenary, 75% of the concurrent, and 66% of the poster abstract presentations were published (P = not significant [NS]), with the majority being published in group 3 journals. Multivariable analysis did not find any factor predictive of publication in plenary, concurrent, or poster groups. Sixty-five percent of all presentations were basic science-related and this did not change over time.

CONCLUSIONS

SGI presentations have an overall publication rate of 68%, which is higher than that reported in the literature for other societies (29-45%). Furthermore, the plenary and concurrent publication rates were not different from the poster publication rate. This suggests that all types of presentations are of quality as measured by publication rate. The SGI continues to publish predominantly basic science research, which is one of its missions.

Publication rates in peer-reviewed journals of abstracts presented at the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Society of Turkey meetings 2007-2012

The purpose of this study was to find out the rate of peer-reviewed publication of full papers of abstracts presented at the annual meeting of the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Society of Turkey, and to identify the time taken for publication, subspecialty, and study design. All abstracts accepted for presentation at the meetings in 2007-12 were identified from the books of abstracts, and evidence of publication was sought from PubMed and Google Scholar. The following variables were evaluated: publication rate, type of presentation (oral or poster), time to publication, subspecialty, study design, name of the journal in which the paper was published, impact factor of the journal, author affiliation, change in number of authors and origin of the study. A total of 1322 abstracts were presented between 2007 and 2012. Of these, 246 (19%) were subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals, including 110/390 oral presentations (28%) and 136/932 poster presentations (15%). Oral presentations were more likely to be published than poster presentations (p=0.000). The mean (SD) time from presentation to publication was 17 (15) months. Anatomical presentations had the highest publication rate (8/11), whereas orthognathic surgery had the lowest (5/67, 7%). Technical notes (5/9) and animal studies (32/70, 46%) were the most common types of publication. Only 246 of the 1322 abstracts (19%) were subsequently published as full papers, which is lower than previously reported in oral and maxillofacial surgery.

Publication outcomes of the abstracts presented at the 2011 European Congress on Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculo-Skeletal Diseases (ECCEO-IOF11): A position paper of the European Society for Clinical and Economical Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculo-Skeletal Diseases (ESCEO) and the International Osteoporosis and Other Skeletal Diseases Foundation (IOF)

The publication outcomes of the abstracts presented during the ECCEO-IOF 2011 reflect a high research productivity, support the robustness of the selection process conducted by the Scientific Advisory Committee and suggest that IOF-ESCEO WCO is successful in its mission to promote and disseminate research.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The European (now World) Congress on Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculo-Skeletal Diseases (IOF-ESCEO WCO, formerly ECCEO-IOF) is the largest worldwide event fully dedicated to the clinical, epidemiological, translational and economic aspects of bone, joint and muscle diseases. The role of the Scientific Advisory Committee is to select abstracts for oral communication or poster presentation based on a short summary of the research. The aim of the present survey was to determine the publication rate in international peer reviewed journals of abstracts accepted at the IOF-ESCEO WCO 2011 Meeting (formerly ECCEO-IOF11), the relationship, if any, between the presentation format of the abstract and its subsequent full publication and the impact factor of the journal in which research was published.

RESULTS

Of 619 abstracts accepted at the 2011 ECCEO-IOF11 annual meeting, 45 were accepted for oral communication and 574 accepted for poster presentation. In the subsequent 3 years (2011-2014), 191 abstracts were published as a full-length manuscript (30.9 %). The publication rate was significantly higher for oral communications (75.6 %) than for poster presentations (27.4 %; p < 0.0001). Publications derived from oral communications were published in journals with a higher impact factor (8.3 ± 10.1) than those arising from poster presentations (4.0 ± 2.3; p < 0.0001), but there was no difference in the time to publication (OC 16.3 [IQR 8.4-23.3] months vs PP 11.3 [IQR 5.3-21.4]; p = 0.14).

CONCLUSION

These results indicate a high research productivity and an appropriate selection of oral communication by the Scientific Advisory Committee of ESCEO-IOF.

Subsequent full publication of abstracts presented in the annual meetings of the Spanish Society of Cardiology

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The Spanish Society of Cardiology holds an annual national meeting with a large number of presentations but the number of full-text publications resulting from these presentations and the journals accepting these manuscripts is unknown. This study aimed to identify the full-text publication rate of accepted abstracts and to analyze the bibliometric features of subsequent publications.

METHODS

We randomly selected a sample of 300 oral presentations at the meetings of the Spanish Society of Cardiology in 2002, 2005 and 2008. Subsequent publications were identified through the Science Citation Index-Expanded, Scopus, Índice Médico Español, and Índice Bibliográfico Español en Ciencias de la Salud.

RESULTS

Of 300 abstracts, 115 resulted in 147 full publications, representing a publication rate of 38.33%. The meeting with the highest publication rate (43%) was held in 2005. The subject category with the highest number of publications was Pediatric Cardiology/Congenital Heart Disease (58.8%). Time to full publication was usually 2 years (30.61%). Articles were published in 57 journals. The journals publishing the highest number of articles were Revista Española de Cardiología (n=55; 37.41%) and the European Heart Journal (n=8; 5.44%).

CONCLUSIONS

The high percentage of articles published in the upper half of journals listed in Journal Citation Reports under the category of cardiac and cardiovascular system (83%) can be taken as an objective quality indicator of the results presented at these meetings. However, more than 60% of the abstracts did not result in full publications, thus depriving the scientific community of potentially interesting results.

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.

Further dissemination of medical education projects after presentation at a pediatric national meeting (1998-2008)

BACKGROUND

Further dissemination of medical education work presented at national meetings is limited.

PURPOSES

The purpose of this study was to explore dissemination outcomes of scholarly work in pediatric medical education.

METHODS

Council on Medical Student Education in Pediatrics (COMSEP) members who presented at COMSEP national meetings from 1998 to 2008 received a questionnaire about scholarly dissemination outcomes. Descriptive statistics and chi-square analysis explored variables related to dissemination. Qualitative analysis of free text comments explored barriers to dissemination.

RESULTS

Outcomes were determined for 81% of presentations (138/171). The dissemination rate was 67% (92/138 presentations), with 47 publications (34%). Dissemination rates did not vary by presentation type (poster vs. oral) or project type. There was no relationship between presentation type, project type, and dissemination method. Barriers included perceived inadequate time, mentorship, and methodological skills for scholarly work.

CONCLUSIONS

Most projects were further disseminated. Additional resources including mentoring and protected time for scholarly work are needed by educators to optimize dissemination.

Funding Anatomic Pathology Research: A Retrospective Analysis of an Intramural Funding Mechanism

Context.—In 2006, the department of pathology at our institution established an intramural research funding mechanism to support anatomic pathology research projects for faculty and trainee development. A review committee consisting of faculty members with diverse academic interests evaluated applications; proposals were eligible for a maximum award amount of $30 000 per project with a maximum program cost of $150 000 annually.

Objective.—To report our experience based on a retrospective review of the research proposals submitted to the committee since the inception of the Anatomic Pathology Research Fund and evaluate the outcomes of the funded projects.

Design.—We retrospectively analyzed all project applications that were received by the committee. Outcome data were collected by reviewing progress reports, abstracts for national and international meetings, PubMed search results, and/or direct communication with investigators.

Results.—To date, a total of 59 individual projects have been awarded funding, for a total amount of $349 792, with an average award amount of $5381 per project. A total of 26 faculty members have secured funding for projects through this mechanism, and 27 resident and fellow trainees have been engaged in the funded projects. Spanning 11 subspecialty disciplines in anatomic pathology, 32 abstracts (54%) have been presented at national meetings and 26 (44%) have been published in the peer-reviewed literature to date. One project generated data used to secure an extramural (R01) grant.

Conclusions.—Our funding mechanism could serve as a model used by other academic departments to support research activities, thereby fostering faculty development through scholarly activities.

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.

Subsequent publication rate of studies from India presented at the annual congresses of SIOP

Subsequent publication as a complete manuscript is a desirable end-point for studies presented at scientific meetings. Between 2001 and 2005, 191 studies from India were presented at annual congresses of the International Society of Paediatric Oncology. Of these 24 (12.6%) were published with a median time to publication of 20 months. This subsequent publication rate is lower than previous reports of SPR for either paediatric or oncological meetings. A lower proportion of oral presentations and randomised clinical trials (RCTs) could partly explain our findings. Further research is needed to understand barriers to subsequent publication of presented data from India.

Factors associated with publication of plenary presentations at the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists annual meeting

OBJECTIVE

To determine the rate and factors associated with publication of plenary abstract presentations from the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists annual meeting.

METHODS

Plenary presentations were reviewed from 2000 to 2005. A PubMed search was performed to identify subsequent peer-reviewed publication of these presentations. Chi-squared test and logistic regression were used for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Of 378 main, focused or express plenary presentations, 173 (45.8%) involved multiple and 205 (54.2%) single institutions. The types of study include: chart review (29.4%), cohort study (28.0%), translational (23.5%), and randomized clinical trial (6.9%). 309 (81.7%) of presentations were subsequently published. The median time from presentation to publication was 14months (range: 1-85). Studies from multiple vs. single institutions were more likely to be published (87.9% vs. 76.6%; p=0.005). In addition, randomized controlled trials were more likely to be published compared with chart review, cohort, and translation research (92.3% vs. 83.8%, 77.4%, and 74.2%; p<0.01). On multivariate analysis, multi-institutional studies (OR=2.28, 95% CI=1.28-4.04; p=0.005) and type of study (OR=1.64, 95% CI=1.19-2.26; p=0.002) were independent factors associated with publication. In addition, multi-institutional studies had longer times from presentation to publication compared with their counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

A high percentage of plenary presentations at the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists annual meeting resulted in subsequent publication. Multi-institutional studies and randomized clinical trials were more likely to be published.

Pediatric hospitalist research productivity: predictors of success at presenting abstracts and publishing peer-reviewed manuscripts among pediatric hospitalists

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors associated with research productivity among pediatric hospitalists.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional online survey of pediatric hospitalists recruited from the American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Hospital Medicine from May to August 2009. We used abstract presentations at a national meeting (intermediate outcome) and 22 first-author peer-reviewed manuscripts (primary outcome) to measure research productivity. Information was also collected on environmental and physician characteristics. Stepwise logistic regression was performed to identify independent associations with research productivity.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifteen pediatric hospitalists completed the survey. The respondents included 82% in an academic environment, 150% fellowship trained, 25% with additional degrees, and 67% with no protected time for research. Fifty-six percent presented an abstract, and 17% had 2 or more publications. After adjusting for potential confounders, pediatric hospitalists were more likely to have presented an abstract if they had fellowship training, an additional degree, were "very interested" or "interested" in performing research, or worked in a free-standing children's hospital or children's hospital within a hospital. Pediatric hospitalists were more likely to have 2 or more publications if they had an additional degree or had presented an abstract.

CONCLUSIONS

Among pediatric hospitalists, obtaining an additional degree and presenting an abstract at a national meeting are associated with research productivity. A minority of this group of pediatric hospitalists had fellowship training, degree training, or 2 or more first-author manuscripts published even though the majority are in an academic environment. These results suggest that structured training and a focus on abstract presentations at meetings could be a programmatic solution.

Are results from pharmaceutical-company-sponsored studies available to the public?

PURPOSE

Only 53% and 63% of studies and clinical trials results presented at congresses are published. Company-sponsored trial results are being posted on publicly accessible Web sites. We analyzed the public availability (publication or posting on a Web site) rate, time to publication, and factors predicting public availability of results of studies sponsored by a pharmaceutical company.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study analyzing all studies conducted by GlaxoSmithKline in Spain between 2001 and 2006. Initiation and completion were defined as first participant/first visit and last participant/last visit (or their equivalents). Papers published up to 31 March 2009 were considered. Logistic regression models were used to identify factors predicting public availability of results.

RESULTS

The cohort comprised 143 studies (94 clinical trials; of these, 87 were included in international products clinical development plans). Public availability rate was 80% (114/143) for all studies and 78% (73/94) for clinical trials; publication rates were 68% and 61%, respectively. The median time to publication for all studies and trials was 27.3 and 28.4 months, respectively. Study associated to a cancelled project was the only significant factor associated with lower publication rate for all studies [odds ratio (OR) 0.069; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02-024; p < 0.001) and trials (OR 0.075; 95% CI 0.016-0.343; p = 0.001) and a lower public availability rate (OR 0.052; 95% CI 0.007-0.382; p = 0.004) for trial results. Therapy area, sample size, positive trial results, duration of experimental phase, and being a clinical trial did not predict publication or public availability.

CONCLUSIONS

Eighty percent of studies included in this analysis are publicly available. Web site posting increases public availability rate of clinical trial results from 61% to 78%. Cancellation of projects is the single factor negatively influencing publication and public availability rates.

The outcome of abstracts presented at the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology annual meetings

Many abstracts presented at scientific meetings are never published as articles in peer-reviewed journals. Using PubMed search and custom computer programs, we retrospectively reviewed all 4824 abstracts presented at the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology annual meetings from 2005 to 2007, and found an overall publication rate of 36% for a 3-year maximal follow-up. This rate is comparable with that of other medical societies with published data. The publication rate varied from 10 to 62% among different subspecialties. The format of presentation, either platform or poster, was also a significant predictor of outcome, with 42-50% publication rate for platform abstracts and 32-36% for poster abstracts. Country of origin and the use of statistical methods did not seem to affect outcome significantly. The average time from abstract submission to article publication was 18 months. Seven journals accounted for over half of all publications, and the top three journals were American Journal of Surgical Pathology (16.2%), Modern Pathology (9.1%), and American Journal of Clinical Pathology (8.3%).

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.

Identifying key components for an effective case report poster: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Residents demonstrate scholarly activity by presenting posters at academic meetings. Although recommendations from national organizations are available, evidence identifying which components are most important is not.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and test an evaluation tool to measure the quality of case report posters and identify the specific components most in need of improvement.

DESIGN

Faculty evaluators reviewed case report posters and provided on-site feedback to presenters at poster sessions of four annual academic general internal medicine meetings. A newly developed ten-item evaluation form measured poster quality for specific components of content, discussion, and format (5-point Likert scale, 1 = lowest, 5 = highest).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Evaluation tool performance, including Cronbach alpha and inter-rater reliability, overall poster scores, differences across meetings and evaluators and specific components of the posters most in need of improvement.

RESULTS

Forty-five evaluators from 20 medical institutions reviewed 347 posters. Cronbach's alpha of the evaluation form was 0.84 and inter-rater reliability, Spearman's rho 0.49 (p < 0.001). The median score was 4.1 (Q1 -Q3, 3.7-4.6)(Q1 = 25th, Q3 = 75th percentile). The national meeting median score was higher than the regional meetings (4.4 vs, 4.0, P < 0.001). We found no difference in faculty scores. The following areas were identified as most needing improvement: clearly state learning objectives, tie conclusions to learning objectives, and use appropriate amount of words.

CONCLUSIONS

Our evaluation tool provides empirical data to guide trainees as they prepare posters for presentation which may improve poster quality and enhance their scholarly productivity.

Transition from congress abstract to full paper: the case of a national Argentinean congress in clinical laboratory

BACKGROUND

Transition from communications (abstracts) of an Argentinean congress and their publication as full papers was analyzed. No similar report was found for clinical laboratory in Latin America.

METHODS

A total of 388 communications from five congresses were identified, and searches were performed on the internet to find the publications. Pairs were established (1 communication, 1 publication), and characteristics were analyzed.

RESULTS

In total, 10.8% of the communications were published. Mean time elapsed was 2+/-1.0 years (x +/- SD). A total of 62% of the publications appeared in Argentinean journals and 38% in foreign journals (5 in Spanish, 11 in English). Mean author number was 4.8+/-2.4 for communications and 5.1+/-2.3 for publications. In total, 59.5% of the publications changed the number and order of authors. Clinical Chemistry was the main topic (45.4% for communications, 38.1% for publications), followed by Microbiology (21.1%, 23.8%). Universities participated in 217 communications (55.9%) and 32 publications (76.2%), while other institutions participated in 171 communications (44.1%) and 10 publications (23.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Publication index was lower than for other congresses. Time elapsed was consistent with others. Preference for Argentinean journals may indicate a focus on local readers but also limitations in language skills. Variations in authorship arise from modifications of individual participation in the final work. More publications from all institutions are desirable. Differences of content were below those reported by others.

The North American Menopause Society: from abstract to publication

OBJECTIVE

The North American Menopause Society (NAMS) provides a forum through which researchers can present scientific abstracts. After presenting an abstract, the goal is to publish the research as a full-length article. The objective for this study was to determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at NAMS meetings.

DESIGN

The PubMed database was searched for full-length, peer-reviewed publications, corresponding to the abstracts presented at the 1999 to 2003 NAMS meetings. When a full-length article was found, the title, authors, date of publication, and the journal were collected.

RESULTS

Of the 661 abstracts presented at the five consecutive annual meetings, 253 (38.3%) have been published in peer-reviewed journals. The average time to publication was 2.0 +/- 1.5 years. The average time to publication for oral presentations was 1.7 +/- 1.3 years, and that for poster presentations was 2.0 +/- 1.5 years (P = 0.241). The publication rate of oral presentations was significantly greater than that of poster presentations (57.7% vs 36.5%; P < 0.003). Manuscripts were published in a total of 97 journals, with four (Menopause, Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, Climacteric, and Maturitas) accounting for 38.3% of the publications.

CONCLUSIONS

The percentage of abstracts published by NAMS is within the range and within a similar time frame compared with other scientific meetings. Oral presentations are more likely to be rapidly published and may therefore be of higher interest and clinical relevance along with sound methodology and results. Menopause contained the most manuscripts, demonstrating a possible preference of submission to the Society's journal.

[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 of abstracts presented at the 2003 urological Brazilian meeting

OBJECTIVE

To determine the publication rate of orally-presented abstracts from the 2003 Urological Brazilian Meeting, as well as the factors determining this publication rate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The publication rate of the 313 orally-presented abstracts at the 2003 Urological Brazilian Meeting was evaluated by scanning the Lilacs, Scielo and Medline databases. The time between presentation and publication, the state and country of the abstract, the research methodology (cross-sectional, case-control, retrospective case series, prospective case series or clinical trial), whether drugs were utilized and the topic of the study were all characterized.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine percent of the abstracts were published after a median time of 14 months (range: 1 to 51 months). There were high publication rates for cross-sectional abstracts (75%), drug utilization studies (51.3%), clinical trials (50%) and prospective case series' (48.1%). However, there was only a moderate statistical trend towards a higher publication rate in the prospective case series (p=0.07), while the retrospective case series' showed statistically lower publication rates than the other groups (33.7%, p=0.04). Abstracts on laparoscopic surgery had the highest publication rate (61.9%, p=0.03) compared to others topics. In 57% of the unpublished abstracts, there was no interest in or attempt to publish, and rejection was responsible for the lack of publication of only 4% of the abstracts.

CONCLUSION

The publication rate of the orally-presented abstracts from the 2003 Urological Brazilian Meeting was comparable to that of international congresses. The subsequent publication of presented abstracts and the selection of prospective studies with stronger evidence should be encouraged and may improve the scientific quality of the meeting.

Peer review in publication: factors associated with the full-length publication of studies presented in abstract form at the annual meeting of the Society for Medical Decision Making

BACKGROUND

: Many studies are presented at scientific meetings and are summarized in abstract form prior to their full-length publication. Publication rates of these studies may be an indicator in judging their quality.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the rate at which studies reported in an abstract form are subsequently published in full length and identify factors associated with publication success.

METHODS

: All abstracts presented at the 25th Annual Meeting of SMDM in October 2003 were reviewed and assessed for subsequent publication in peer-reviewed journals through December 31, 2007. For each abstract we recorded the presenting author's affiliation, presentation mode, and country of origin. For published articles, we recorded the publication date, type of journal, and the journal's impact factor. We calculated the mean and median time from conference presentation to publication using a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

: Of 239 presented abstracts, 64 (27%) were subsequently published in full-length, including 39% of podium, and 20% of poster presentations (P = 0.002). Mean and median times from presentation to publication were 20.5 and 19.0 months, respectively. There was no significant difference in mean publication lag for podium and poster presentations.

CONCLUSIONS

: A significant proportion of studies presented at the SMDM meeting are not published in full length. This failure to publish is substantially higher as compared with findings from other medical and biomedical meetings. A further study is needed to explore the reasons for this low publication rate and to compare the fate of SMDM meeting abstracts to those of similar conferences.

An observational study of the proceedings of the All India Ophthalmological Conference, 2000 and subsequent publication in indexed journals

Aims:

To determine the quality of reporting in the proceedings of the All India Ophthalmological Conference (AIOC) 2000, subsequent rate of publication in an indexed journal and differences between the proceedings and the journal version of these papers.

Design:

Observational study.

Materials and Methods:

All papers presented at the AIOC 2000 were retrieved from the proceedings and assessed for completeness of reporting. To determine the subsequent full publication, a Medline search was performed as of January 2007; consistency between the proceedings paper and the final publication was evaluated. Statistical analysis: Chi square and Fisher′s exact tests were used to compare publication rates based on geographical location, subspecialty and study design; Student′s t-test was used to compare differences based on the number of authors and sample size.

Results:

Two hundred papers were retrieved; many failed to include study dates, design or statistical methods employed. Thirty-three (16.5%) papers were subsequently published in indexed journals by January 2007. The published version differed from the proceedings paper in 27 (81.8%) instances, mostly relating to changes in author name, number or sequence.

Conclusions:

The overall quality of reporting of scientific papers in the proceedings of the AIOC 2000 was inadequate and many did not result in publication in an indexed journal. Differences between the published paper in journals and in proceedings were seen in several instances. Ophthalmologists should be cautious about using the information provided in conference proceedings in their ophthalmic practice.

Subsequent publication of abstracts presented at the International Association of Paediatric Dentistry meetings

BACKGROUND

Presentation of scientific information at international meetings is important for the dissemination of new scientific research. It is often assumed that the information contained in an abstract will subsequently be published in a scientific journal in full-length form.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this investigation was to study the publication rate of abstracts presented to the International Association of Paediatric Dentistry (IAPD) congresses in London 1999 and Paris 2001, and factors that predict subsequent publication were also investigated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Abstracts presented at the IAPD congresses were reviewed. A Medline/PubMed search, encompassing 1999-2006, was performed.

RESULTS

At the two IAPD congresses, a total of 771 abstracts were presented, 231 (30%) as oral presentations, 327 (42%) as poster discussion presentations, and 212 (28%) as poster presentations. During the period studied, 204 (27%) of the 771 abstracts were expanded into articles published in Medline/PubMed indexed journals. The publication ratio for orally presented abstracts was 40%, poster discussion presentation 21%, and for poster presentations 19% (P < 0.0001). The mean time from the congress to publication was 20 months.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study show that 40% of orally presented abstracts at IAPD congresses were followed by a subsequent scientific publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

Publication of abstracts presented at 2001 NAACT

INTRODUCTION

The timely and formal publication of material presented as abstracts at national meetings is critical to the dissemination of new information to the medical community. We designed a retrospective study to evaluate the publication rates of abstracts presented at a recent national toxicology conference. In addition, we attempted to determine whether readily identifiable characteristics could predict a greater likelihood of publication.

METHODS

In June of 2004, we reviewed 237 abstracts from the 2001 North American Congress of Clinical Toxicology (NACCT). Abstracts were classified according to methodology and content. We then searched Medline, using PubMed, to determine the publication of each abstract.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven of 237 abstracts (24.1%) were subsequently published in peer reviewed journals. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of publication when abstracts were categorized with respect to methodology. When categorized with respect to content, abstracts related to natural toxins had a higher publication rate (41.2%; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Three years after presenting abstracts at the 2001 NACCT meeting, the majority of abstracts remain unpublished. This is a lower rate than noted by other specialty medical societies.

Transition from congress abstract to full publication for clinical trials presented at laser meetings

The present study aims to identify (1) what proportion of abstracts of clinical trials presented at The American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery (ASLMS) annual meetings are published as full reports, (2) time to publication, and (3) factors that may predict the publication of research in peer-reviewed journals. Two investigators independently hand-searched all abstracts of the ASLMS meetings to identify all reports of clinical trials. Details of sample size, the country of origin, topic of research, type of presentation, type of laser, direction of outcome, and statistical significance were recorded for each abstract. To determine the full publication status of each study, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and EMBASE was searched. A total of 198 abstracts were identified. Of these, 87 abstracts (44%) have been fully published. The average time from presentation at the meeting to full publication was 57 months (95% confidence interval = 52-61), and the estimated rate of abstracts published at 1, 2, and 4 years was 15, 30, and 38%, respectively. There is significant tendency for being fully published in high-power laser studies, with USA as country of origin, and orally presented. Our findings supports this opinion that conference abstracts can be an important source for systematic reviews and failure to identify trials presented in congresses might threaten the validity of systematic reviews.

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

PURPOSE

To estimate the acceptance rate of peer-reviewed journals, to describe the time course of subsequent full publication, and to identify those with characteristics associated with publication of the abstracts presented at the World Congress of Endourology (WCE).

METHODS

All abstracts accepted for presentation at the 2001 and 2002 WCE meetings were identified from the published supplements to the Journal of Endourology. The subsequent publication rate for the corresponding studies was evaluated by scanning MEDLINE for the 5-year period after the meetings.

RESULTS

Overall, 20.5% of the abstracts were followed by publication in peer-reviewed journals. Abstracts on transurethral, laparoscopic, and percutaneous procedures had the highest publication rates (25.5%, 25%, and 24.3%, respectively). Studies from North America had the highest publication rate (29.2%). The mean time to publication was 14.6 months. There was an 80% chance that an eventually published abstract was in print 2 years after presentation. The largest number of the reports were published in the Journal of Endourology (75 of 234; 32%), the official publication of the society that sponsors the WCE.

CONCLUSIONS

Only one fifth of the abstracts presented at the WCE are ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals. Attendees should be aware of this limitation, and scientific committees should be encouraged to be more selective. Although presentation at major urological congresses constitutes an invaluable method for rapid scientific dissemination, abstracts contain data that usually are difficult to access and of questionable validity. In this respect, investigators are encouraged to publish their data.

Fate of the abstracts presented at three Spanish clinical pharmacology congresses and reasons for unpublished research

OBJECTIVES

To assess the publication rate of abstracts at 5 years after their presentation at three consecutive clinical pharmacology congresses and to examine the reasons relating to the lack of publication.

METHODS

Oral and poster presentations from the congresses of the Spanish Society of Clinical Pharmacology (SSCP) in 1994, 1996, and 1998 were reviewed. Authors were contacted to determine the fate of their presented studies and the reasons for not publishing them. Publications of abstracts with unknown fate were searched the in PubMed database. Determinants of publication were examined by Cox regression.

RESULTS

In all, 248 abstracts were analysed. The cumulative publication rate at 5 years was 26%, and the median time for publication was 18 months (range: 2-60). The European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology was the English language medical journal where most abstracts were published. The median impact factor of the articles published was 1.96 (range: 0.29-8.32). The author survey identified a lack of time (38.2%) and a lack of interest (33.3%) as the main reasons for failure to publish. The only predictor of an abstract's publication was to be affiliated with a university department (hazard ratio: 1.98, 95% confidence interval: 1.20-3.27).

CONCLUSIONS

Only one-quarter of the abstracts presented at SSCP congresses were subsequently published. A lack of time and interest were the main reasons given for not submitting these presentations for publication. Authors, scientific societies and editorial boards should enhance publications as full papers in peer-reviewed journals of the abstracts presented at meetings.

Abstracts presented at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting: determinants of subsequent peer reviewed publication

PURPOSE

Abstracts submitted to medical meetings do not undergo the same critical peer review process as published manuscripts. Despite this limited scrutiny presented abstracts often influence clinical thinking and practice. Consequently the peer reviewed publication rate of abstracts becomes critical in judging the quality of this research. We determined this publication rate and factors influencing it.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All 1,584 abstracts presented at the 2000 American Urological Association Annual Meeting were reviewed and assessed for subsequent publication with a fixed MEDLINE search protocol. We searched for publications from January 1, 1999 to May 31, 2005. Abstracts were deemed published if 1) at least 1 author of the presented abstract was a manuscript author and 2) at least 1 conclusion in the presented abstract was included in the final publication conclusions. Publication rates according to mode and topic of presentation, country or state of origin and time to publication were calculated. Journal impact factors for publications were compared according to these variables.

RESULTS

Of presented abstracts from the 2000 American Urological Association meeting 55% went on to successful publication, including 59% of podium, 55% of poster, 55% of unmoderated poster and 42% of video presentations. Mean time from presentation to publication was 17 months. The average journal impact factor was 3.2.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of presentations at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting is never subjected to or fails the critical peer review process. The overall journal impact factor for published manuscripts is modest. Meeting attendees should consider these observations when deciding whether to incorporate the findings of presentations into their clinical practice.