How many presentations are published as full papers?

Bibliometric analysis and conversion rate of abstracts presented at the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology into publication of full articles

INTRODUCTION

the presentation of research at a congress is an interesting means for scientific dissemination, but only with publication in an indexed journal does the data become accessible and disseminated. The conversion rate in published articles of abstracts presented at congresses is an indicator to assess the scientific quality of those events. The aim of this study is to evaluate bibliometric characteristics of abstracts presented at the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology and to determine the factors that affect publication rates.

METHODS

Retrospective evaluation of all abstracts presented at the Brazilian Congresses of Coloproctology from 2015 to 2019. Multiple databases were analyzed to estimate the conversion rate of the presented papers, as well as variables associated with the conversion of abstracts into full manuscripts through bivariate analysis and multivariate variables of these predictors.

RESULTS

1756 abstracts were analyzed. Most studies are retrospective, series or case reports, and even personal experience. The conversion rate was 6.9%. The presence of statistical analysis was twice as high for published abstracts as for unpublished ones.

CONCLUSION

the data presented demonstrate a low scientific productivity of the specialty, since the research carried out is, for the most part, not published as complete manuscripts. The predictors of publication of abstracts were: multicenter studies, studies with statistical analysis, study designs with a higher level of evidence and studies awarded by the congress.

Factores asociados y tasa de publicación de los trabajos presentados en las ediciones del Congreso Científico Nacional de la Sociedad Científica Médico Estudiantil Peruana. 2010-2014

Introducción. El Congreso Científico Nacional (CCN) es un evento anual realizado en Perú y en el que estudiantes de medicina de todo el país presentan sus trabajos de investigación. Objetivos. Determinar la tasa de publicación y los factores asociados a la publicación en revistas científicas indexadas de los trabajos de investigación presentados a las ediciones del CCN realizadas entre 2010-2014 y describir las características de los trabajos publicados. Materiales y métodos. Estudio retrospectivo en el que se revisaron 407 resúmenes de trabajos de investigación. Se consideró una ventana de tiempo de publicación de 6 años (a partir de la presentación). Se realizó un análisis bivariado para evaluar las diferencias entre las variables categóricas y numéricas con las pruebas chi-cuadrado y U de Mann-Whitney, respectivamente. Además, se realizó un análisis multivariado mediante modelos de regresión de Poisson (uno crudo y uno ajustado), calculando valores de riesgo relativo (RR) con sus respectivos intervalos de confianza al 95% (IC95%) para determinar los factores asociados con la publicación de los trabajos. Se consideró un nivel de significancia de p<0.05. Resultados. La tasa y la mediana de tiempo de publicación fueron 23.83% (IC95%: 19.93%-28.23%) y 14 meses (RIC: 5-23), respectivamente. En el análisis bivariado, el año de presentación y el número de asesores se asociaron con la publicación de los trabajos (p=0.020 y p=0.007). En el análisis multivariado, se encontró que los trabajos con un asesor o aquellos con dos o más asesores tuvieron una probabilidad de publicación 2.19 y 2.61 veces mayor que los que no tenían asesor (RR: 2.19; IC95%: 1.10-4.36 y RR: 2.61; IC95%: 1.28-5.33, respectivamente). Conclusiones. La cuarta parte de los trabajos se publicaron en una revista científica y la participación de un asesor o más incrementó significativamente la probabilidad de publicación.

Discrepancies between Conference Abstracts and Published Manuscripts in Plastic Surgery Studies: A Retrospective Review

Background

Inconsistency in results and outcomes between presented abstracts and corresponding published articles can negatively affect clinical education and care. The objective of this study was to describe the frequency of clinically meaningful change in results and outcomes between abstracts presented at the American Association of Plastic Surgeons annual conference and the corresponding published articles, and to determine risk factors associated with discrepancies.

Methods

All abstracts delivered as oral presentations at the American Association of Plastic Surgeons conference (2006-2016) were reviewed. Results and outcomes were compared with those in corresponding articles. We defined clinically meaningful discrepancy as any change in the directionality of an outcome, or a quantitative change in results exceeding 10%.

Results

Four hundred eighty-six abstracts were identified. Of these, 63% (N = 305) advanced to publication. Of the published studies, 19% (N = 59) contained a discrepancy. In 85% of these (N = 50), discrepancies could not be explained by random variation. Changes in sample size were associated with heightened risk for a discrepancy (OR 10.38, 95% CI 5.16-20.86, P < 0.001). A decrease in sample size greater than 10% increased the likelihood of a discrepancy by 25-fold (OR 24.92, 95% CI 8.66-71.68, P < 0.001), whereas an increase in sample size greater than 10% increased the likelihood of a discrepancy by eight-fold (OR 8.36, CI 3.69-19.00, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Most discrepancies between abstract and published article were not due to random statistical variation. To mitigate the possible impact of unreliable abstracts, we recommend abstracts be marked as preliminary, that authors indicate whether sample size is final at time of presentation, and that changes to previously reported results be indicated in final publications.

Publication rate of presentations at Korean plastic surgery meetings: The R&R Forum, KSAPS, and KSPRS (2011-2015)

Background

Since the initial Research and Reconstruction Forum (R&R Forum) in 2011, the R&R Forum, Korean Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (KSAPS), and Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (KSPRS) have held annual meetings. This study was conducted to provide updated information on the publication rate of presentations at those meetings.

Methods

Plastic surgery–related abstracts presented at the R&R Forum, KSAPS, and KSPRS between 2011 and 2015 were collected. The sessions were divided into free papers, posters, and e-presentations (or e-posters) for each annual meeting. Abstract publication status was confirmed through PubMed, Google Scholar, the KCI-Korean Journal Database, and the KMbase database.

Results

In total, 2,335 abstracts were presented in the free paper, poster, and e-presentation sessions. Of these, 622 (26.6%) were published. The overall publication rates were 240 of 684 abstracts (35.1%) presented at the R&R Forum, 56 of 216 abstracts (25.9%) presented at the KSAPS meetings, and 326 of 1,435 abstracts (22.7%) presented at the KSPRS meetings. In terms of specific annual meetings, the 2014 R&R Forum had the highest publication rate (39.9%), followed by the 2015 KSAPS (31.0%) and the 2015 KSPRS (28.8%).

Conclusions

Scientific researchers present diverse results at these professional meetings, with a focus on innovative surgical techniques and improved surgical outcomes. This is our second study on this topic. Despite its limitations, this study indirectly shows that the recognition of Korean plastic surgeons and the quality of the annual meetings of Korean societies of plastic surgery have risen to the global level.

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.

Conversion of Plastic Surgery meeting abstract presentations to full manuscripts: a brazilian perspective

Objective

to assess the conversion rate of Plastic Surgery meeting abstract presentations to full manuscript publications and examine factors associated with this conversion.

Methods

we assessed the abstracts presented at the 47th and 48th Brazilian Congresses of Plastic Surgery by cross-referencing with multiple databases. We analyzed the Abstracts' characteristics associated with full manuscript publications.

Results

of the 200 abstracts presented, 50 abstracts were subsequently published in full, giving the conference a conversion rate of 25%. The mean time to publish was 15.00±13.75 months. In total, there were 4.93±1.63 authors per abstract and 67.8±163 subjects per abstract; 43.5% of the abstracts were of retrospective studies; 69% comprised the plastic surgery topics head and neck, and chest and trunk, and 88.5% had no statistical analysis. Overall, 80% of the manuscripts were published in plastic surgery journals, 76% had no impact factor and 52% had no citations. Bivariate and multivariate analyses revealed the presence of statistical analysis to be the most significant (p<0.05) predictive factor of conversion of abstracts into full manuscripts.

Conclusion

the conversion rate found from this bibliometric research appeared a bit lower than the conversion trend of international plastic surgery meetings, and statistical analysis was a determinant of conversion success.

Tracing the 'grey literature' of poster presentations: a mapping review

BACKGROUND

Posters are a popular way of presenting information at conferences. However, little research has been conducted into their development, and the patterns and extent of their use are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

A mapping review was performed to chart the development and utilisation of the poster medium, and to highlight the main literature themes and contributions.

METHODS

A search for the term 'poster presentation' was conducted simultaneously in 249 databases. Results were categorised by discipline and analysed by decade. The results were used to form an informetric-based mapping review.

RESULTS

(i) Medicine and health care disciplines are the predominant poster users and since 1990 have accounted for 68-75% of the overall published data. (ii) Over 99% of the returns led only to abstract or title citations for conference posters. (iii) Poster presentations offer much potentially useful information, but remain difficult to access.

CONCLUSIONS

If the aim of poster presentation is to share and discuss information with others, then the limitations of poster abstracts and questions raised in the retrieved literature suggest that further efforts are required to make this more effective. Library and information specialists of all disciplines are likely to play a key role in such developments, and especially those from the medicine and health care disciplines which feature so prominently.

Analysis of subsequent publication and impact of abstracts presented at the Sir Peter Freyer Surgical Symposium: Focus on the Plenary Session

BACKGROUND

The quality of abstracts presented at a conference reflects the academic activity and research productivity of the surgical/scientific association concerned. The abstract to publication rate (44.5 % internationally), is an important indicator of the quality of presented research.

AIM

To evaluate the publication rate and impact of abstracts presented at the plenary session of the Sir Peter Freyer Surgical Symposium over a 25-year period (1989-2014), and identify factors influencing publication.

METHODS

Plenary abstracts were identified from abstract books of the Symposium from 1989-2014. The authors, institution, subspecialty and research subject were recorded. A Medline search with name of the first and last author, key words and content of all abstracts was conducted to identify related publications. The impact factor (IF) of the journal and the time to publication was recorded.

RESULTS

298 presented abstracts resulted in 168 publications (publication rate: 56 %). Basic Science research accounted for 80 % (n = 237) of the total number of presentations with the remaining 20 % (n = 61) being categorised as clinical research. Overall, cancer research accounted for 48 % of presented work. The average time to publication was 2 ± 7 years, while 11 % of all published studies achieved publication in the year of the symposium. The median impact factor for published research was 3.558 (IF range 0-39).

CONCLUSION

These results indicate that the quality of papers presented at the Sir Peter Freyer Surgical Symposium compares favourably with international equivalents, making this meeting an important forum for Irish Academic Surgery.

What is the fate of scientific abstracts? The publication rates of abstracts presented at the 7th National Congress of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Objective:

Oral and poster presentations held at national and international congresses are recognized as valuable tools for sharing current scientific data and experience among physicians. However, a large proportion of these works fail to be published in scientific journals. We have designed a study to identify the publication rate of presentations held at the 7^th National Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology in 2009.

Materials and Methods:

A systematic search of databases was performed using author names and key words from the abstract title to locate publications in peer-reviewed journals corresponding to the presentations held at the 7^th National Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Information regarding mode of presentation, topic, type of affiliation, name and impact factor of the scientific journal, change in author names and time elapsed between presentation and publication were recorded and analyzed statistically.

Results:

Of 243 abstracts that were presented at the congress, 45 papers (18.5%) were published in international peer-reviewed journals, whereas 39 (16%) were published in national journals. The mean time to publication was 17±2 months for international and 11±4 months for national journals (p=0.102). The international publication rate of oral presentations was significantly higher than that of poster presentations (50% vs. 16.2%; p<0.03). The manuscripts were published in a total of 21 journals, with four journals accounting for 49% of the publications. The comparison of the publication rates of the universities with other institutions has yielded no significant difference.

Conclusion:

Alltough a significant proportion of the abstracts presented in the 7^th National Gynecology and Obstetrics Congress have been succesfully converted to publication overall, only a limited percentage of all abstracts have been published in international peer-reviewed journals. The relatively higher conversion to international publication rate of the oral presentations show that they are of higher interest and clinical relevance.

Full-text publication of abstracts presented at European Orthodontic Society congresses

INTRODUCTION

Empirical evidence has indicated that only a subsample of studies conducted reach full-text publication and this phenomenon has become known as publication bias. A form of publication bias is the selectively delayed full publication of conference abstracts. The objective of this article was to examine the publication status of oral abstracts and poster-presentation abstracts, included in the scientific program of the 82nd and 83rd European Orthodontic Society (EOS) congresses, held in 2006 and 2007, and to identify factors associated with full-length publication.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed and Google Scholar databases was performed in April 2013 using author names and keywords from the abstract title to locate abstract and full-article publications. Information regarding mode of presentation, type of affiliation, geographical origin, statistical results, and publication details were collected and analyzed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Approximately 51 per cent of the EOS 2006 and 55 per cent of the EOS 2007 abstracts appeared in print more than 5 years post congress. A mean period of 1.32 years elapsed between conference and publication date. Mode of presentation (oral or poster), use of statistical analysis, and research subject area were significant predictors for publication success.

LIMITATIONS

Inherent discrepancies of abstract reporting, mainly related to presentation of preliminary results and incomplete description of methods, may be considered in analogous studies.

CONCLUSIONS

On average 52.2 per cent of the abstracts presented at the two EOS conferences reached full publication. Abstracts presented orally, including statistical analysis, were more likely to get published.

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.

[How to prepare a poster presentation]

Scientific and educational poster presentations in national and international meetings are one of the most effective means of scientific communication. Poster presentations are of particular importance in a mainly visual speciality like radiology, and also play a significant role in continuing medical education in our specialty. However, poster should be no more than an intermediate step on the way to publish our work in a scientific journal. The publication rates of posters prented in courses and conferences is very low in our country. Therefore, we must continue to progress in training in scientific publication, with efforts such as this supplement. This article review how to create an effective poster presentation.