Publication rates of podium versus poster presentations at the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine meetings: 2006-2010

Publication rates of abstracts presented at American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons annual open and closed conferences: 2015-2019

Background

The annual meetings hosted by the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) present the latest prepublication literature in shoulder and elbow surgery, facilitating early dissemination of novel findings that impact clinical decision-making. Evaluating the publication rate of presented abstracts at ASES conferences becomes crucial in assessing the quality of research showcased, as these presentations often precede the peer-review process.

Methods

The ASES conference programs from 2015-2019 were reviewed to identify presented abstracts. For each abstract, the title, author(s), conference year, and meeting type (open vs. closed) were recorded. The names of the author(s) of each abstract were searched in the PubMed and Google Scholar databases to determine if there was an associated published manuscript. For each identified manuscript, the title, author(s), date of publication, publishing journal, impact factor of the publishing journal, level of evidence, and number of citations were recorded.

Results

A total of 316 abstracts were presented as podium lectures at ASES open and closed meetings between 2015 and 2019. Within 3 years of presentation, 240 (75.9%) of the presented abstracts resulted in publication. There was an increase in the proportion of abstracts resulting in publication within 3 years of the presentation from 2015-2019 (R = 0.8733, P = .053). Overall, the proportion of presented abstracts that went on to publication in peer-reviewed journals also increased (R = 0.8907, P = .043). Manuscripts of abstracts presented at open meetings had a shorter time to publication (8.78 vs. 11.82 months; P = .0160) and were cited more often (40.89 vs. 30.11, P = .0099) than those presented at closed meetings.

Conclusion

There has been an increase in the publication rate of abstracts presented at ASES annual meetings in the study period. Published manuscripts of abstracts presented at ASES open conferences were published faster, and were cited more often, than closed conferences. ASES conferences allow for the presentation of high-quality prepublication literature in shoulder and elbow surgery.

Seventy Percent of Abstracts Presented at the AANA Annual Meeting Are Later Published

Purpose

To assess the future publication rates of abstracts presented at AANA annual meetings between 2015 and 2019.

Methods

Abstracts presented at the 2015-2019 AANA annual meetings were identified. The PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched for a corresponding manuscript for each abstract using the name of the first author, abstract title, and keywords. A level of evidence and anatomic category were assigned to each abstract. For each corresponding manuscript identified, the authors, journal of publication, journal impact factor (IF), time to publication, and number of citations were recorded.

Results

Overall, 70.5% of abstracts presented at the 2015-2019 AANA annual meetings (275 of 390) went on to future publication, with 63.6% (248 of 390) achieving publication within 3 years. The median time to publication from presentation was 12.8 months. Arthroscopy (29.8%) was the most frequent journal of publication. The average IF of publishing journals was 4.92 ± 3.41, with 61.8% of manuscripts (170 of 275) published in journals with an IF of at least 4.00. Published manuscripts received an average of 36.30 ± 47.6 citations per manuscript. A stronger level of evidence was associated with an increased likelihood of future publication (P = .008).

Conclusions

Pre-publication literature presented at the AANA annual meetings has continued to be associated with a strong likelihood of future publication in Arthroscopy and Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation, as well as other respected peer-reviewed journals.

Clinical Relevance

Exposure to pre-publication literature may have an impact on clinical management. It is important to understand the quality of research presented in abstracts from AANA annual meetings. Knowing how many abstracts are ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals provides an indicator of the quality and reliability of the research.

No difference in abstract publication rates between the open and closed American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons meetings from 2013 to 2019

BACKGROUND

The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) society has advanced the practice of shoulder and elbow care through the exhibition of research at academic meetings. The ASES annual meeting is a closed (member-only) conference annually held in October, while the specialty day is an open (non-members included) event that takes place during the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) meeting week in March. This study aims to compare the rate of publication for abstracts presented at the open and closed ASES meetings from 2013 to 2019.

METHODS

The ASES website was searched to obtain the annual meeting and specialty day program agendas from 2013 to 2019. A standardized search protocol was employed to identify conference abstracts that went on to be published. Publications associated with an ASES abstract were analyzed through several variables including the time to publication, journal impact factor (JIF), and level of evidence.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the rates of publication of the open (76.5%, 121/158) and closed (75.3%, 223/296) meetings (P = .904). The median time to publication significantly differed between the open (7 months, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.0-10.0) and closed (11 months, 95% CI: 9.0-13.0) meetings (P = .02). There was no difference between the median JIF between the open (2.69, 95% CI: 2.41-2.81) and closed (2.73, 95% CI: 2.41-2.81) meetings. The distribution of the level of evidence in published articles comparing the open and closed meetings did not differ significantly (P = .446).

DISCUSSION

The overall quality of academic research presented at orthopedic subspecialty conferences can be objectively evaluated through abstract publication rates. Our analysis demonstrates that there is not a single significant difference among the publication rates, median JIF, and level of evidence distribution between the ASES open and closed meetings from 2013 to 2019. Impactful research is showcased at both the open and closed meetings. Societies that limit submissions from members only at annual meetings can consider soliciting research from non-members. While the quality of research would not decline if non-ASES members were invited to participate, the presence of a closed annual meeting may be a valuable tool for societies to expand their reach through member-exclusive benefits.

Publication Rates of Abstracts Presented at American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine Annual Meetings From 2016 to 2019

Background

Research in the form of poster and podium abstracts is disseminated at subspecialty society meetings. The quality of this research can be defined by exploring the ultimate publication rate of the presented abstracts.

Purpose

To investigate (1) the manuscript publication rate of abstracts presented at the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM) annual meeting; (2) whether abstract format (poster vs podium) influences overall or 2-year publication rates and time to publication; (3) the abstract factors that are associated with increased publication rate; and (4) whether publication quality as measured by journal of publication, level of evidence (LOE), and number of citations differs between posters and podiums.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

Poster and podium abstracts that were presented at the AOSSM annual meetings between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019, were included. The PubMed and GoogleScholar databases were searched by abstract title and authors to determine whether the related manuscript had been published. For published manuscripts, the journal, journal impact factor (IF), time to publication, authors, and LOE were recorded.

Results

The manuscripts of 664 abstracts (341 poster, 323 podium presentations) were published during the study period. The overall publication rate was 52.4%. Publication within 2 years of the meeting was found to be higher in podium abstracts (45.8%) compared with poster abstracts (37.8%) (P = .0366). Podium abstracts had a shorter time to publication (P < .001), higher LOE (P = .0166), more citations (P < .0001), and were published in higher IF journals (P = .0028). Poster presentations were more likely to undergo a change in first author between the time of the conference and future publication (P = .0300). The most common journal of publication was the American Journal of Sports Medicine (36.8%).

Conclusion

Abstracts presented at the AOSSM annual meeting had a high rate of publication within 2 years. There was no difference in publication rates between podium and poster abstracts, but podium abstracts had a shorter time to publication and more future citations and were published in journals with higher IFs.

Publication rate of abstracts presented at the Australian Orthopaedic Association Annual Scientific Meeting

BACKGROUND

Presentations at scientific conferences are an important method of research dissemination, with abstracts often used to inform clinical practice. Abstract to publication ratio is a commonly used tool for determining meeting quality. The aim of this study was to determine the publication rate for abstracts presented at the Australian Orthopaedic Association Annual Scientific Meeting (AOA ASM) between 2012 and 2015 inclusive and identify reasons for non-publication.

METHODS

MEDLINE, PubMed and Google Scholar were searched to determine whether each abstract presented at AOA ASMs between 2012 and 2015 was associated with a full text publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Where a publication could not be located, the presenter was contacted to confirm the reason for non-publication.

RESULTS

A total of 1130 abstracts were submitted (951 oral and 179 posters), and 573 resulted in full-text peer-reviewed publications (51%). The majority of publications (73%) were published within 2 years of presentation. There was no difference in likelihood of publication for oral presentations compared to posters, nor in the rate of publication across the 4 years of meetings. Common reasons for non-publication were lack of time (32%), publication considered low priority (27%) and journal rejections (22%).

CONCLUSION

The overall publication rate for abstracts presented at the AOA ASM is 51%, which is an increase from the 1998 ASM (31%). This publication rate is higher than many similar Australian meetings and on par with other international orthopaedic and subspecialty meetings. Future research should investigate potential publication bias and methods to minimise barriers to publication.

Publication Rates of Abstracts Presented at Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America Meetings Between 2013 and 2016

BACKGROUND

Academic conferences such as the annual Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America (POSNA) meeting provide opportunities to present up-to-date scientific work that can influence clinical decision making. This study reviewed 4 years of abstracts presented at POSNA to assess trends in poster and podium presentation publication rates and associated metrics and the impact of academic presentations on the pediatric orthopaedic literature.

METHODS

All abstracts presented at POSNA annual meetings from 2013 to 2016 were analyzed for presentation type, subspeciality, level of evidence, study design, peer-reviewed publication within 4 years of presentation, 1-year publication rates, journal impact factors, number of authors, and citations of the final publication. χ2, analysis of variance, and t tests were conducted to measure independence of variables. Statistical significance was indicated at P<0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 1135 abstracts were included with 676 published in peer-reviewed journals by August 2020 and 38 excluded because of publication before presentation. The number of accepted abstracts increased yearly. Total of 58.2% of POSNA abstracts were published and 42.5% had the same first author on the final manuscript. Average journal impact factor was 2.60±1.30 with a mean 14.3±16.0 citations. Podium presentations were significantly more likely to be published than poster presentations (63.1% vs. 51.2%, P<0.001) and in higher-impact factor journals. Level I evidence abstracts were published in journals with an average 1.663 higher impact factor than level V evidence abstracts, with no significant difference between overall publication rate and study type (P=0.69) or level of evidence (P=0.95) for podium presentations. The Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics accepted the most abstracts, 38.4% overall, with 64.1% of acceptances resulting from podium presentations and no difference in time to publication based on subspecialty.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall publication rate for POSNA abstracts has increased 8.7% from prior analysis. Podium presentations are more likely than poster presentations to be published, overall and in higher-impact journals, and are cited more frequently.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV-descriptive retrospective epidemiological study.

Study Groups and POSNA: A Review of Podium Presentations From 2006 to 2020

BACKGROUND

Study groups are multicenter collaborations aimed at improving orthopaedic decision-making through higher-powered, more generalizable studies. New research is disseminated through peer-reviewed literature and academic meetings, including the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America (POSNA) annual meeting, which brings together academic and medical professionals in pediatric orthopaedics. The goal of this study was to identify patterns in podium presentations (PP) at the POSNA annual meeting resulting from multicenter study groups during a 15-year period.

METHODS

A total of 2065 PP from the 2006 to 2020 POSNA annual meetings were identified. The abstracts of each PP were reviewed to determine if they resulted from a multicenter study group and for characteristics including subspecialty focus. PP from 2006 to 2018 were further reviewed for publication in academic journals. Pearson correlation was used to assess change in the number of PP resulting from study groups overtime. Univariate analysis was used to compare characteristics of PP based on study group involvement (significance P<0.05).

RESULTS

The proportion of PP resulting from study groups increased from 2.2% (n=2) in 2006 to 9.4% in 2020 (n=16) (R2=0.519, P=0.002). Of the PP resulting from study groups, 52.9% focused on spine, 26.5% on hip, 2.9% on sports, and 2.0% on trauma. This is compared with a distribution of 16.7% (P<0.001) spine, 15.9% (P=0.005) hip, 9.5% (P=0.026) sports, and 14.6% (P<0.001) trauma focus of PP not from study groups. There was no difference in publication rate of PP resulting from study groups compared with those that were not (69.1% vs. 66.2%, P=0.621).

CONCLUSIONS

In the 15-year period from 2006 to 2020, there was a nearly 5-fold increase in the proportion of POSNA PP resulting from study groups. Spine surgery is disproportionately supported by study groups, suggesting that there is an opportunity to establish new study groups across the breadth of pediatric orthopaedics.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V.

Trends in topics presented as posters at the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) annual meetings for the last 7 years: implications of an SRS annual meeting abstract registry (Part II)

PURPOSE

Analyzing and comparing past Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) poster and podium presentations would allow members to see trends in areas of interest and help authors guide future research efforts.

METHODS

Abstract books from 2011 to 2017 were retrieved and titles were extracted. From each title and abstract body, keywords were identified and collected. Keywords were categorized into several groups: subjects of study, topics not related to treatment, conservative treatment, surgery, treatment result, complications, revision, long-term follow-up, cost, and questionnaire. Each category was subcategorized based on specific topics. Assignments of keywords were manually checked against their abstracts. The frequency of each keyword was ranked to represent areas of interest and trended according to year. The results were compared to trends in podium presentations.

RESULTS

The most popular keywords in each group were similar to those of the podium presentations. There has been an increasing trend for: Early Onset Scoliosis, Radiographic Diagnosis, and Sagittal Alignment. There has been a decreasing trend for: Neuromuscular, X-ray, Posterior Surgery, Osteotomy, Pedicle Screws, Mental Failure/Misplaced Screw, Revision, and Hospital Stay. The distribution of topics of the poster presentation was not significantly different from those of podium presentation, but podium has more long-term follow-up studies.

CONCLUSION

We report trends in SRS poster presentations. We found no significant difference between the topics of poster and those of podium presentations. We hope this data could help members better prepare for future meetings.

Comparison of Publication Rates for Musculoskeletal Oncology Abstracts Presented at National Meetings

BACKGROUND

Scientific meetings provide a forum to disseminate new research and advance patient care. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), Connective Tissue Oncology Society (CTOS), and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) annual meetings are examples of such gatherings in the field of musculoskeletal oncology. After a review of select MSTS abstracts from 1991 to 1999 revealed a 41% publication rate in scientific journals, previous authors cautioned meeting attendees that the majority of abstracts may not survive rigorous peer review and may not be scientifically valid. Since two decades have passed, this study reexamined publication rates and characteristics in a contemporary and expanded cohort of oncology abstracts presented at the AAOS, CTOS, and MSTS annual meetings.

METHODS

1408 podium and poster abstracts from the AAOS (oncology-focused from 2013 to 2015), CTOS (2012 to 2014), and MSTS (2012 to 2014) annual meetings were reviewed to allow for a four-year publication window. Searches were performed with PubMed and Google Scholar databases to identify full-text publications using abstract keywords. Characteristics of each abstract and resulting publication were collected. Statistical analysis was performed using the chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests for time-independent comparisons, and the log-rank test after reverse Kaplan-Meier analysis for time-dependent comparisons.

RESULTS

Abstract publication rates overall were higher for podium presentations (67%, 280 of 415) compared to poster presentations (53%, 530 of 993; p < 0.001). When both abstract types were combined, differences between meetings did not meet statistical significance (AAOS: 65%, 106 of 162; CTOS: 57%, 521 of 909; MSTS: 54%, 183 of 337, p=0.06). Abstracts from AAOS meetings were more often published prior to the first day of the meeting (AAOS: 24%, 25 of 106; CTOS: 10%, 52 of 521; MSTS: 14%, 25 of 183; p < 0.01). After excluding previously published abstracts, AAOS abstracts had the shortest time to publication (median: 10.8 months, interquartile range (IQR): 4.4 to 18.8 months), compared to those from CTOS (16.0 months, 8.4 to 25.9 months, p < 0.01) and MSTS (15 months, 7.9 to 25.0 months, p < 0.01) meetings. CTOS abstracts were published in higher impact journals (median: 3.7, IQR: 2.9 to 5.9), compared to those from AAOS (2.9, 1.9 to 3.2, p < 0.01) and MSTS (3.1, 2.3 to 3.1, p < 0.01) meetings. Finally, 7.7% (62 of 810) of published abstracts were presented at more than one meeting.

CONCLUSIONS

Publication rates in this study were higher than previous reports in musculoskeletal oncology and comparable or better than recent reports for other orthopedic meetings. Comparisons across the AAOS, CTOS, and MSTS annual meetings highlight notable differences but suggest similarity overall in the quality of evidence presented with little overlap between meetings. Taken together, this study points to progress in the review processes used by the program committees, reaffirms the importance of critical appraisal when considering abstract findings, and supports the continued organization of multiple scientific meetings in musculoskeletal oncology.

Publication rate of studies presented at the French Arthroscopic Society Meeting in 2014

INTRODUCTION

Publication rates for studies reported at French Arthroscopic Society (Société francophone d'arthroscopie, SFA) meetings are not known. A comprehensive search of podium presentations to the 2014 SFA meeting was performed, assessing: (1) publication rate for meeting abstracts, and (2) bibliometric parameters including journal Impact Factor.

HYPOTHESIS

The full-text publication rate for abstracts accepted for the 2014 French Arthroscopic Society (SFA) meeting was around 47.1%: i.e., the rate reported for the 2013 meeting of the French Society of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology (SoFCOT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Bibliometric analysis of all abstracts accepted for the 2014 SFA annual meeting was undertaken by the Junior French Arthroscopic Society (SFA Junior), who collated the podium presentations. Reported studies were retrospective in 43 cases (54%) and prospective in 36 (46%). They consisted in clinical studies in 52/79 cases (66%), experimental studies in 4 (5%), cadaver or animal studies in 13 (16.5%), epidemiological studies in 8 (10%), a case report in 1 (1.2%) and a literature review in 1 (1.2%). Thirty-two (40.5%) concerned the shoulder and 31 (39%) the knee. Publication was checked on systematic PubMed-Medline search of authors' names. Articles found on PubMed-Medline were downloaded into the SIGAPS scientific publication search, management and analysis system database. Journal impact factor and SIGAPS category (A to E) were obtained, as were number of citations and h-index. This was a descriptive study, assessing numbers; results were reported as number and percentage.

RESULTS

Overall publication rate was 31/79 (39.2%): 20/31 clinical studies (64.5%), 6 cadaver studies (19.4%), 3 epidemiology studies (9.7%), 1 experimental study (3.2%) and 1 literature review (3.2%). Mean 2014 SFA meeting-to-publication time was 18.7 months [range, -2 to 60 months]. Journal SIGAPS categories were A for 4 articles (13.3%), B for 13 (43.3%), C for 3 (10%), D for 9 (30%), with no E category articles but 1 article (3.3%) without SIGAPS category.

CONCLUSION

The publication rate for abstracts accepted for report to the 2014 SFA annual meeting was lower than for the 2013 SoFCOT meeting. The high level of the journals in question testified to the quality of the studies reported at the SFA meeting.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study.

Publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the AANS/CNS Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the AANS/CNS Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves (Spine Summit).

METHODS

The authors used a search algorithm in PubMed to determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at the Spine Summit from 2007 to 2012. The variables assessed were presentation modality, topic, meeting year, publication year, destiny journal and its 5-year impact factor (IF), country, and citation count (retrieved from the Scopus database).

RESULTS

One thousand four hundred thirty-six abstracts were analyzed; 502 were oral presentations and 934 were digital poster presentations. The publication rate was 53.97% (775/1436). The mean time from presentation to publication was 1.35 ± 1.97 years (95% CI 1.21-1.49 years). The mean citation count of published articles was 40.55 ± 55.21 (95% CI 36.66-44.44). Oral presentations had a higher publication rate (71.51%, 359/502) than digital posters (44.54%, 416/934; OR 3.13, 95% CI 2.48-3.95, p < 0.001). Oral presentations had a higher number of citations (55.51 ± 69.00, 95% CI 48.35-62.67) than digital posters (27.64 ± 34.88, 95% CI 24.28-31.00, p < 0.001). The mean IF of published articles was 3.48 ± 2.91 (95% CI 3.27-3.70). JNS: Spine (191/775, 24.64%), Spine (103/775, 13.29%), and Neurosurgery (56/775, 7.23%) had the greatest number of published articles. The US represented the highest number of published articles (616/775, 79.48%).

CONCLUSIONS

The publication rate of the Spine Summit is among the highest compared to other spine meetings. Many of the abstracts initially presented at the meeting are further published in high-IF journals and had a high citation count. Therefore, the Spine Summit maintains its high standards of scientific papers, which reflects the high quality of the research performed in the spine surgery field in North America.

Characteristics and Publication Rates for Podium Presentations at National Hand Surgery Meetings from 2007 to 2012

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the research presented at the annual meetings of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) and the American Association for Hand Surgery (AAHS). Podium presentation data were extracted from the abstract books of the annual meetings of the ASSH and AAHS from 2007 to 2012. Corresponding publications were identified using searchable online publication databases and an algorithm linking authorship and content. The majority of research was clinical and the most common topics were trauma, degenerative conditions, and biomechanics. The most common body region of interest was the wrist/forearm. ASSH podium presentations were of a stronger level of evidence and were more likely to be published. The mean times to publication for research presented at the ASSH and AAHS meetings were 16.7 and 16.4 months, respectively. Presentations from each society were subsequently published at higher proportions in their affiliated journals. Furthermore, in comparison to AAHS presentations, a significantly larger proportion of research presented at the ASSH meetings was published in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery , while a larger proportion of AAHS presentations were published in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Microsurgery .

The Proportion of Abstracts Presented at the 2010 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Annual Meeting Ultimately Published

As attendees of orthopedic meetings consider how to integrate presented information into their practice, it is helpful to consider the quality of the data presented. One surrogate metric is the proportion of and changes to presented abstracts that become journal publications. With this study, using the 2010 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Annual Meeting abstracts, the authors sought to answer the following questions: Did the publications following abstract presentations differ in terms of the conclusions, study subjects, or coauthors? What proportion of abstracts was published? What are the most common subtopics and journals, and what is the most common author country? Keywords and authors from the 2010 AAOS Annual Meeting proceedings program (698 podium and 548 poster abstracts) were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar. If a publication resulted, differences in the conclusion, number of study subjects, and authorship between the abstract and the journal publication were tabulated. The proportion of abstracts published, specialty subtopics, authorship country, and journals of publication were collected. At journal publication, 1.7% of podium and 1.7% of poster conclusions changed. Mean number of authors for podium and poster increased significantly (P<.001), and 30% of podium and 44% of poster had a change in the number of study subjects. The overall journal publication percentage was 61% (68% podium and 53% poster). The majority of the authors were from the United States. The most common journal was The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. It is important to evaluate the usefulness and clinical applicability of meetings, especially the final disposition of conference abstracts, from various angles to ensure that they are as worthwhile and educational as possible. [Orthopedics. 2020;xx(x):xx-xx.].

Characteristics and trends in publications of abstracts presented at the Canadian Ophthalmological Society Annual Meetings: 2010-2015

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the publication rate of abstracts presented at the Canadian Ophthalmological Society (COS) Annual Meetings from 2010 to 2015.

DESIGN

A retrospective review and literature search of abstracts presented at the COS Annual Meetings from 2010 to 2015.

METHODS

Abstracts were obtained from the scientific programs for the 2010-2015 COS meetings, excluding 2014 (data unavailable). Title, author number, presentation type, subspecialty, institution, and study design were collected. MEDLINE and PubMed were searched in duplicate using abstract title, key words, and authors. Publication date, journal, impact factor, and citation score were recorded for each publication. Publication rates were determined by year of abstract presentation, presentation type, study type, subspecialty, author number, institution, and time to publication.

RESULTS

876 abstracts were presented, of which 326 (37.3%) were posters and 548 (62.7%) were oral presentations. The publication rate was 42.9% (375 publications) with a 16-month median time to publication. The publication rate did not vary significantly by presentation type or year. Publication rates were highest among vision rehabilitation (75.0%) and glaucoma (52.0%) subspecialties; basic science research (65.0%) and systematic reviews/meta analyses (62.0%) study designs had the highest representation. Most presentations were published in the Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology (117 presentations, 31.2%). The mean impact factor and citation score for published abstracts were 2.39 ± 2.3 and 1.70 ± 1.16, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The publication rate of abstracts presented at the COS Annual Meetings has remained stable across this 5-year analysis. Publication rates are comparable to those of other specialty conferences.

Abstracts Accepted for Presentation at Orthopaedic Trauma or Arthroplasty Conferences: Which Conference Is the Best Indicator of Future Publication?

Time and financial resources pose limitations to orthopaedic surgeons wishing to advance their orthopaedic knowledge, and surgeons frequently must choose one meeting to attend. We sought to determine whether abstracts presented at the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) annual meeting or the trauma (Orthopaedic Trauma Association [OTA]) or arthroplasty (American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons [AAHKS]) subspecialty meetings, respectively, were higher yield with respect to material ultimately being published. We hypothesized that papers accepted by AAOS would demonstrate higher conversion to publication compared with OTA and AAHKS but expected abstract publication rates from OTA and AAHKS to be similar.

Gender Trends in Authorship of Foot and Ankle Academic Literature Over 24 Years

Underrepresentation of females in surgery is reflected in research productivity across academic medicine, with male faculty being more likely to publish research than their female counterparts. In this study, we aimed to describe the representation and longevity of female investigators among the authors of articles in 3 foot and ankle research journals from 1993 to 2017. In this retrospective bibliometric analysis, authors from 3 prominent foot and ankle research journals (Foot and Ankle International, The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery, and Foot and Ankle Clinics) were identified. The proportion of female authors who were first, middle, and senior authors and the total publication count per author were determined. From 1993 to 2017, 8132 original articles were published and a total of 6597 (81.1%) had an accessible author list. This allowed us to identify 25,329 total authors, of whom 22,961 (90.7%) were successfully matched to a gender. A total of 9273 unique authors were identified (females, 19.2%). Female representation increased for first and senior authors over the years from 6.5% and 5.9% (1993 to 1997) to 16.9% and 13.1% (2013 to 2017, p < .001), respectively. However, compared with male authors, female authors published fewer articles (mean: 1.7 versus 2.4, p < .001). Of the 2691 authors who first published during 2006 to 2011, 369 authors (13%), consisting of 8.1% females and 15% males (p < .001), continued to publish 5 years after their initial publication. Female representation in academic foot and ankle research has increased >2-fold over the past 2 decades. But despite these advances, compared to male authors, female authors are less likely to continue publishing 5 years after initial publication, and on average publish fewer articles.

Factors relating to the publication rate of abstracts presented from 2012 to 2015 at the Society for Vascular Surgery Annual Meeting

OBJECTIVE

The Society for Vascular Surgery's Annual Meeting acts as a means of disseminating research findings among vascular surgeons through the presentation of research abstracts. Following presentation at the meeting, research is often compiled into a full-text manuscript and submitted to a peer-reviewed journal. However, not all abstracts accepted to the Vascular Annual Meeting (VAM) eventually have a corresponding full-text publication. The objectives of this study were to establish the publication rate of abstracts presented between 2012 and 2015 to the VAM and to identify factors correlating with publication status.

METHODS

Abstracts presented at the VAM were available through the Journal of Vascular Surgery. Data extracted from eligible abstracts included level of evidence according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence scheme, type of study (prognostic, therapeutic/harm, diagnostic), sample size, and status of outcome (positive, negative, or descriptive findings). Publication status of the abstracts was determined through a comprehensive literature review of PubMed (MEDLINE), Ovid (MEDLINE), and Embase. A multivariable logistic regression was conducted to determine factors correlating with publication status.

RESULTS

The publication rate during the study period was 43.0% with a median time to publication of 9 months, with 412 of the 958 abstracts having a corresponding full-text publication in 48 journals with weighted mean impact factor of 3.40. Eleven journals collectively published 372 (90.3%) of the articles, with the Journal of Vascular Surgery publishing 280 (68.0%) of the manuscripts. Our logistic regression model demonstrated that factors positively affecting publication status were a positive status of outcome (odds ratio, 2.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-4.28) and a logarithmic increase in the sample size of the study (odds ratio, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-1.60). In addition, studies with a corresponding full-text publication had a greater median sample size (250) compared with those without one (143; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

From 2012 to 2015, 43.0% of VAM abstracts had a corresponding full-text publication, with greater sample size and a positive status of outcome positively correlating with likelihood of publication. Studies with negative findings made up a small proportion of conference abstracts (9.6%) and were the least likely to be published. Given the relatively small size of the specialty of vascular surgery, it may be particularly important to be mindful of publication bias. It may be worthwhile to give additional consideration to acceptance of abstracts or publication of studies with negative results that meaningfully contribute to the literature.

Are We Spending Wisely? Impact of POSNA Grants on Scholarly Productivity and Future Funding Success

BACKGROUND

The Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America (POSNA) funds grants to improve pediatric musculoskeletal care and maximize new knowledge through publications, presentations, and further funding. We assessed the productivity of POSNA grants by number and rate of grant-specific publications, citations, and extramural funding; determined whether project type or completion status was associated with extramural funding; and compared the success of POSNA-funded versus all other podium presentations by publication rate and POSNA awards.

METHODS

We reviewed final reports for all 85 POSNA grants from 2003 to 2014. To determine grant productivity, we assessed the publication, presentation, and extramural funding rates, and the percentage of grants that achieved at least 1 scholarly output (publication or presentation). Citation counts were determined within 3 years after publication.

RESULTS

Overall, each grant achieved ~1.53 publications and 15.4 citations. Thirty-three percent secured extramural funding. However, 25% of grants could not be tracked to a scholarly product. Projects that reached completion and were of the basic science type (compared with clinical) were more likely to receive extramural funding. Compared with all other podiums, a greater proportion of POSNA-funded presentations led to a publication (64% vs. 48%, respectively; P=0.02) and were more likely to receive a POSNA award. Approximately 52% of funded projects were not presented at POSNA meetings.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most POSNA-funded projects led to scholarly output, 25% of them produced no publications or podium presentations. POSNA-funded projects were more likely to lead to a publication and to have a higher chance of winning a POSNA award compared with all other projects. The POSNA grant process is effective at identifying impactful research, but continued process improvement, such as a prospectively maintained database of grant recipient productivity and improved tracking of grant submission histories, are both in development as the first steps to improve accountability of grant recipients in translating their projects to scholarly products.

High Publication Rate of Abstracts Presented at Lumbar Spine Research Society Meetings

Background

Although publication rates from multiple orthopedic research conferences have been published in the literature, the publication rates of abstracts presented at the Lumbar Spine Research Society (LSRS) meetings have never been reported. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the publication rates from the LSRS annual meeting years 2008-2012 and then to compare those rates with that of other spine research society meetings.

Methods

Podium presentations from 2008 to 2012 and poster presentations from 2010 to 2012 were reviewed. For each presentation, a PubMed search was performed to determine if a full-text publication existed. χ² tests were used to compare LSRS publication rates to those of other spine meetings. In addition, impact of published articles was evaluated by average citation count and average journal impact factor.

Results

From 2008 to 2012, a total of 332 podium and poster presentations were identified. The overall publication rate was 55.1% (183/332). For podium presentations, this was greatest in 2012 (66.0%) and lowest in 2008 (51.5%). For poster presentations, this was greatest in 2012 (53.6%) and lowest in 2010 (25.0%). The publication rate of presentations is statistically greater than the publication rates of Eurospine (37.8%, P < .001), North American Spine Society (40.0%, P < .001), The International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine (45.0%, P = .012), and the Scoliosis Research Society (47.0%, P = .042) but not statistically different than that of Cervical Spine Research Society (65.7%, P = .059). In addition, the average citation count per published article categorized by year ranged from 13 to 31. The average journal impact factor of published articles categorized by year ranged from 2.31 to 2.55.

Conclusions

While LSRS is a relatively young society, these findings point to the high quality of presentations at this scientific meeting. These findings speak to the scientific rigor of presentations at LSRS.

Clinical Relevance

This study helps clinicians and scientists gauge the quality of a research meeting and make informed choices on which gatherings to attend.

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.

Rate of conversion of reports presented at the Turkish Society of Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy and Knee Surgery Congress into publication

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the conversion rate of oral and poster presentations into publications presented at four consecutive congresses held by the Turkish Society of Sports Injuries and Arthroscopy between 2008 and 2014 and to determine the publication pattern.

METHODS

The manuscripts published in peer-reviewed journals were identified using the Web of Knowledge, PubMed, Google Scholar databases, ULAKBIM, and Endnote citation management software (X7.7.1). The identified manuscripts were classified according to the level of evidence, number of citations, subject, publication journals, time period until publication, and citation index of the journal.

RESULTS

Between 2008 and 2014, a total of 561 presentations were made, comprising 278 posters and 283 oral presentations. Of these presentations, 164 (29.2%) were published as a manuscript. Of the published articles, 114 were originated from oral presentations (40.2% of total) and 50 from poster presentations (18% of total). A significantly higher number of oral presentations compared to poster presentations were converted into publications (p < 0.05). However, no significant difference was determined between the conversion rates of oral and poster presentations in 2014. The mean time from presentation at the congress to publication was 15.4 months (range: -144 months to +62 months). The mean impact factor of the journals at the time of publication increased for each congress. Evidence level of presented articles was significantly higher in the 2014 congress when compared to previous congresses.

CONCLUSION

The rate of conversion into publication was higher for oral presentations, which can be attributed to the fact that studies with a higher level of evidence are more likely to have been presented as oral presentations. Based on these study results, authors of oral presentations at congresses should be encouraged to increase the rate of conversion into publication.

Analysis of Publication Trends for the 2011-2015 American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine Annual Meeting Abstracts

BACKGROUND

Academic conferences are sources of novel research that can influence clinical decision making. Orthopaedic surgery maintains a relatively high rate of publication compared with other surgical subspecialties, and sports medicine conferences hold an even higher rate within the subspecialty. The American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM) annual meetings have been shown to have among the highest rates of publication for accepted abstracts.

PURPOSE

To determine differences between 2-year publication rates of poster and podium abstracts accepted into the AOSSM annual meetings and identify factors associated with publication.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

The AOSSM archives were queried for all accepted poster and podium presentations for annual meetings from 2011 through 2015. Google Scholar and MEDLINE databases were used to determine which abstracts transitioned into journal articles. Publication rates were compared based on publication 2 years following presentation. Logistic regression was performed to demonstrate which variables were most correlated with successful publication. Data on publication impact factor and number of citations were collected by use of the InCites database.

RESULTS

Of 628 abstracts accepted during this period, 265 were poster presentations and 363 were podium presentations. Overall, 44.7% of abstracts presented were accepted into peer-reviewed journals within 2 years of presentation. No statistical difference was found between poster and podium presentations for journal publication (P = .328). Poster presentations were published in journals with statistically lower impact factor (P = .005) and had a statistically lower number of citations (P < .001) compared with podium presentations. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that only number of authors was correlated with publication (P = .003).

CONCLUSION

Podium and poster presentations accepted into AOSSM conferences had equal rates of publication within 2 years and should influence decision making equally. The relative impact of podium presentations appeared to be greater, which suggests that the AOSSM selects podium presentations that will have greater clinical impact. Increasing number of coauthors was the only factor found to be correlated with publication.

Manuscript Submission Patterns of Authors Publishing in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Journals

Background

Previous studies have examined the most cited articles in orthopaedic sports medicine research and the journals in which they were published.

Purpose

To analyze the manuscript submission patterns of authors who published manuscripts in various orthopaedic sports medicine journals.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

All articles published in the March 2017 and April 2017 issues of Arthroscopy, the American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM), Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy (KSSTA), and the Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine (OJSM) were searched. In addition, the past 50 sports medicine-related articles published in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS) dating back from April 2017 to May 2015 were searched. The corresponding author of each article was asked whether the publishing journal was the first journal of submission. If the article was previously submitted elsewhere, authors were asked which other journals, the dates of submission, and the order of submission. The proportion of articles that were initially submitted to each journal, the mean number of submissions prior to publication, and the mean duration from initial submission to date of publication were calculated for each journal.

Results

A total of 298 articles were included in this study, and 221 (74%) corresponding authors responded to the survey. The mean number of submissions before acceptance was 1.05 for AJSM, 1.18 for JBJS, 1.20 for KSSTA, 1.38 for Arthroscopy, and 2.19 for OJSM. The percentage of articles that were submitted to their accepting journal first (ie, not previously submitted elsewhere) was 95% for AJSM, 85% for JBJS, 82% for KSSTA, 68% for Arthroscopy, and 13% for OJSM.

Conclusion

Among the orthopaedic sports medicine journals included in this study, articles published in AJSM have the highest percentage of first submissions.

Publication Rate of Avian Medicine Conference Abstracts and Influencing Factors: 2011-2015

International conferences on avian medicine and surgery aim to disseminate scientific and evidence-based information in the form of oral presentations and posters. Most manuscripts presented are printed in the conference proceedings as abstracts. Subsequent publication in a scientific peer-reviewed journal is the natural outcome of the research cycle, although studies have shown that the vast majority of conference abstracts are not published. The purpose of this study was to explore 1) the fate of abstracts presented in avian conferences (Association of Avian Veterinarians, European Association of Avian Veterinarians, International Conference on Avian Herpetological and Exotic Mammal Medicine) in the years 2011-2015, 2) assess the publication rate in peer-reviewed journals, 3) describe the time course of subsequent publication, and 4) identify factors associated with increased likelihood of publication. The results showed that 24% of conference abstracts were published within the next 2 years. Depending on the statistical model used, several factors were identified as associated with increased publication rate. North American papers seem to publish with more frequency (univariate model), while European papers had the opposite trend (multivariable model). Likewise, experimental studies were more prone to being published overall (univariate model), whereas retrospective observational studies had a lower rate of publication (multivariable model). Increasing the number of authors was also associated with increased publication rate. Most publications were published in the Journal of Avian Medicine and Surgery, which tends to suggest that this journal is the main journal of the specialty. Some parameters highlighted in this study may assist conference attendees to assess the likelihood of later publication.

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.

What is the fate of scientific abstracts presented at the International Society for Hip Arthroscopy meetings?

Publication rates for general sports medicine society meetings have been studied but little is known about the publication rate for subspecialty sports medicine meetings. The purpose of this study was to determine the publication rates of abstracts presented at the annual meeting of the International Society for Hip Arthroscopy (ISHA) from 2011 to 2014. A database of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of ISHA was compiled. Abstracts that reached manuscript publication were determined using a PubMed search of the Medline database and Google Scholar. Statistical analyses were primarily descriptive. A total of 220 podium abstracts and 454 posters were presented at ISHA annual meetings from 2011 to 2014. Of the 220 podium presentations, 118 (53.6%) were eventually published with 91.5% of these being published within 3 years. Of the 454 posters, 182 (40.1%) were published with 95.6% being published in 3 years. Podium presentations had a significantly higher publication rate (P < 0.001). Published podium and poster presentations were most frequently published in the Journal of Arthroscopy and Related Research (podium: 24.6%; poster: 28.6%). The overall publication rate of scientific abstracts presented at the Annual ISHA meeting approximates that of general sports medicine society meetings. Podium presentations are significantly more likely to be published than scientific research presented as poster. These findings may highlight the scientific and educational merit of content presented. Continued attention is needed to maintain and improve the quality of abstracts presented at ISHA meetings.

Current Publication Rates of Abstracts Presented at the Orthopaedic Trauma Association Annual Meetings: 2005-2010

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the publication rate of abstracts presented at the 2005-2010 Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) Annual Meetings.

METHODS

All abstracts from the 2005 to 2010 OTA meetings were identified through the OTA's official website. Each abstract was searched across PubMed and Google to determine its publication status. The overall publication rate of abstracts was determined, along with the first authors' sex, number of authors, time and journal of publication, and analyzed with statistical testing.

RESULTS

Of the 392 abstracts presented at the 2005-2010 OTA meetings, the overall publication rate was 66.3%, with an overall mean time to publication of 28.3 months. The Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma published 38.5% of published OTA abstracts, the most of any journal. The proportions of published OTA abstracts with female first authors exhibit increasing trends within the time period.

CONCLUSION

The quality of research presented at OTA meetings is relatively high compared with other orthopaedic meetings, with 66.3% of OTA abstracts progressing to peer-reviewed publication. The publication rate of 2005-2010 OTA abstracts was greater than that of the 1990-1995 abstracts. The Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma remains the most frequent publisher of manuscripts presented as abstracts at OTA meetings. Although most abstracts are eventually published, the information presented at these meetings, like all scholarly work, should be critically evaluated as they have undergone a less robust peer-review process and may be modified in the future in preparation for publication.

Adult Reconstruction Studies Presented at AAOS and AAHKS 2011-2015 Annual Meetings. Is There a Difference in Future Publication?

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare adult reconstruction abstracts presented at the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) and the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) annual meetings.

METHODS

A total of 1355 podium and 1731 poster presentations from the adult reconstruction sections of the AAOS and AAHKS meetings from 2011 to 2015 were reviewed for publication in peer-reviewed literature. Authors who were added or removed from the original abstract and the final manuscript were recorded. The corresponding journals were assigned the most recent impact factor. The publication rates for each annual meeting, the mean changes in authorship and journal's impact factors were compared.

RESULTS

There were 2129 abstracts presented at AAOS and 957 abstracts presented at AAHKS. The overall publication rate was different between AAOS and AAHKS (56% vs 60%, P = .030). Compared with AAOS, there were more AAHKS abstracts published in 2011 (57% vs 77%, P = .0008) and 2012 (57% vs 76%, P = .0001); however, there were no significant differences in 2013, 2014, or 2015. The mean overall change in authors was lower for AAOS compared with AAHKS abstracts (0.78 vs 1.06, P < .0001). The mean journal's impact factors for AAOS and AAHKS publications were also similar (2.86 vs 2.85, P = .874).

CONCLUSION

AAOS and AAHKS abstracts presented in the adult reconstruction subspecialty had a similar overall rate of publication, change in authorship, and impact factor. It would be beneficial if further studies subdivided these into basic and clinical science and review articles.

Publication of Podium Presentations at the Orthopaedic Trauma Association Annual Meetings: 2008-2012

OBJECTIVE

To determine journal publication rates of podium presentations from the OTA Annual Meetings between 2008 and 2012.

METHODS

Podium presentations from the 2008 to 2012 OTA annual meeting were compiled from the Annual Meeting archives. During December 2016, and Google Scholar were performed using individual keywords in the abstract title and content. The results were reviewed for matches to the meeting abstracts with regard to the title, authors, and abstract content. Yearly publication rates were calculated, along with time to publication and common journals for publication.

RESULTS

The publication rate for the 357 podium abstracts presented at the OTA between 2008 and 2012 was 72.8%. Eighty-one percent of abstracts were from the US institutions. The mean time to publication from podium presentation was 23.4 months, and the most common journals of publication were Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (45.4%) and The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (15.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

The publication rate of the podium presentations at the OTA Annual Meeting from 2008 to 2012 has increased since previous years. Compared with other orthopaedic subspecialty and nonorthopaedic specialty meetings, the OTA publication rate is among the highest in the medical field. OTA annual meetings are an opportunity for early access to high-quality research in the area of orthopaedic trauma.

Publication Rate of Podium Presentations From the North American Spine Society Annual Meetings

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the publication rate of podium presentations from the North American Spine Society (NASS) annual meetings from the years 2009 to 2011.

METHODS

In April 2015, a PubMed search was conducted using titles from the paper presentations as well as the authors. Of the search results that were found, the specific scientific journal in which the article was published was recorded. We analyzed further the top 4 destination journals and trends in publications in these journals over the study period. No study funding was obtained for this research, and there are no potential conflicts of interest or associated biases.

RESULTS

Over the study period, 671 paper presentations were available and 342 were published (51% publication rate). The highest publication rate was from the 2011 annual meeting, with 55.3%, and the lowest year was 2010, with a rate of 46.43%. Spine (32.75%), The Spine Journal (19.01%), Journal of Neurosurgery Spine (7.31%), and European Spine Journal (6.73%) were the top 4 destination journals. Over the study period, we found a significant decrease in publication rate in Spine (P = .001) and a significant increase in publication rate in The Spine Journal (P = .003). There were no significant difference in publication rate over the study period in Journal of Neurosurgery Spine (P = .15) or European Spine Journal (P = .23).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to our knowledge evaluating the publication rate of podium presentations from recent North American Spine Society annual meetings. We found an overall publication rate of 51%.

Publication Rates for Oral Manuscript and Poster Presentations From the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons: 2010 to 2014

The American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons (ACFAS) annual conference has served as a premiere platform to disseminate the latest innovations and research in the field of foot and ankle surgery. The quality of national society conferences is often assessed indirectly by analyzing the the journal publication rate of the abstracts presented. The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess the journal publication rate for abstracts (oral manuscripts and posters) accepted for presentation at the ACFAS conference from 2010 to 2014. All accepted abstracts from this period were compiled by the ACFAS office. PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus searches were performed using abstract titles and author names. Overall, the journal publication rate was 76.9% (83 of 108) for oral manuscripts and 23.2% (258 of 1113) for poster abstracts. The mean time to publication was 9.6 (range 0 to 44) months and 19.8 (range 0 to 66) months for oral and poster abstracts, respectively. The most common journal for abstract publication was The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery. Notably, the ACFAS oral manuscript publication rate from 2010 to 2014 (76.9%) exceeded its previously reported rate from 1999 to 2008 (67.5%) and the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society podium publication rate from 2008 to 2012 (73.7%). To the best of our knowledge, the publication incidence for oral abstracts presented at the ACFAS conference is now the highest reported of any national foot and ankle society conference to date.

An In-Depth Analysis of Publication Characteristics of Podium Presentations at the Arthroscopy Association of North America Annual Meetings, 2011-2014

PURPOSE

To determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA) from 2011 through 2014 and to compare the level of evidence (LoE) between published and unpublished studies.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar for all abstracts given as podium presentations at the 2011 through 2014 AANA Annual Meetings. A publication rate was calculated from all presented abstracts. Each abstract was reviewed to determine the study's LoE (I-V or nonclinical). Among published studies, the average time from presentation to publication was calculated. The journals in which these studies were published were also noted.

RESULTS

A total of 290 abstracts were given as podium presentations at AANA Annual Meetings from 2011 through 2014. Of the 290 studies presented, 195 (195/290, 67%) were published in peer-reviewed journals. Of the 195 published studies, 184 (184/195, 94%) were published within 3 years of the meeting date. Studies were most frequently published in Arthroscopy (n = 59) and the American Journal of Sports Medicine (n = 48). The average time from presentation to publication was 12.2 months. Overall, there was no significant difference between published and unpublished studies in terms of LoE (P = .24).

CONCLUSIONS

In recent years, studies presented at AANA Annual Meetings have achieved a high publication rate (67%). Based on other studies, this publication rate is comparable to recent American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM) Annual Meetings and is higher than that of AANA Annual Meetings from previous years. The level of evidence of presented studies does not necessarily correlate with eventual publication.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The publication rate and level of evidence of podium presentations at AANA demonstrate the scientific impact the annual meeting has for peers pursuing orthopaedic research.

Progress in the Full-Text Publication Rate of Orthopaedic and Sport Physical Therapy Abstracts Presented at the American Physical Therapy Association's Combined Sections Meeting

Study Design Descriptive study. Background Professional meetings, such as the American Physical Therapy Association's (APTA's) Combined Sections Meeting (CSM), provide forums for sharing information. However, it was reported that only one-quarter of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy abstracts presented at the CSM between 2000 and 2004 went on to full-text publication. This low conversion rate raises a number of concerns regarding the full dissemination of work within the profession. Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine the full-text publication rate of work presented in abstract form at subsequent CSMs and investigate factors influencing the rate. Methods A systematic search was undertaken to locate full-text publications of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy abstracts presented at CSMs between 2005 and 2011. Eligible publications were published within 5 years following abstract presentation. The influences of year of abstract presentation, APTA section, presentation type, institution of origin, study design, and study significance were assessed. Results Over one-third (38.6%) of presented abstracts progressed to full-text publication. Odds of full-text publication increased if the abstract was presented as a platform presentation, originated from a doctorate-granting institution, reported findings of an experimental study, or reported a statistically significant finding. Conclusion The full-text publication rate for orthopaedic and sports physical therapy abstracts presented at recent CSMs has increased by over 50% compared to that reported for the preceding period. The rate is now in the range of that reported in comparable clinical disciplines, demonstrating important progress in the full dissemination of work within the profession. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, Epub 7 Oct 2017. doi:10.2519/jospt.2018.7581.

Do we publish what we preach? Analysis of Spanish Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Society publication rates

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to analyse the publication rate of studies presented as podium presentations in the Spanish Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (SECHC) congresses.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-two abstracts presented at the SECHC congresses held in 2007, 2009 and 2011 were included for the purpose of the study. The oral communications were categorized by study type, sample included and follow-up. In June 2017, possible publications of these studies were searched in PubMed. Type of study, delay in publication, journal and impact factor obtained were recorded. The concordance between the information presented at the congress and their subsequent full-text publications was analysed.

RESULTS

The publication rate was 17.21% (21 of the 122 abstracts studied) after 6 years, with a mean time spent for publications of 36.71 months, and a mean impact factor of 1.51. There were no differences between results initially presented at the congresses and those subsequently published (P>0.05).

DISCUSSION

The majority of papers presented at SECHC congresses do not end up with a publication. The papers that are published do not usually contain significant differences compared to the content delivered at the congress.

Publication Rates of Abstracts Accepted to the 2010-2012 Annual Meetings of the North American Spine Society

MINI: The publication rate of conference abstract presentations as full-length manuscripts is a potential measure of meeting quality. 43.8% of abstracts presented at the 2010-2012 North American Spine Society annual meetings were published as full-length manuscripts within 3 years. Podium presentations and "Best" or "Outstanding" paper presentations were more likely to be published.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of conference abstracts.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the publication rate of podium and poster presentations at the 2010-2012 North American Spine Society (NASS) annual meetings.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Presentations at medical conferences are utilized to disseminate new clinical information. The orthopedic literature estimates the rate of publication for abstracts presented at major meetings to be between 34.0% and 67.1%. However, few studies have analyzed the publication rate of accepted abstracts to the NASS annual meetings.

METHODS

All abstracts presented at the 2010-2012 NASS annual meetings were reviewed. PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched to determine whether each abstract was published as a full-length manuscript before or up to 3 years after its NASS meeting presentation. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, Poisson regression with robust error variance, and linear regression.

RESULTS

A total of 1045 abstracts were accepted to the 2010-2012 NASS annual meetings. 43.8% were published before or up to 3 years after their NASS presentation. Podium presentations were more likely to be published than poster presentations (47.1% vs. 37.7%, P = 0.005). Abstracts with "Best" or "Outstanding" designations were also more likely to be published than abstracts without those designations (54.4% vs. 45.0%, P = 0.034). Presentations designated as "Best" or "Outstanding" articles had shorter time to publication than presentations without those designations (369 vs. 486 days, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that only 43.8% of abstracts accepted to NASS are published as full-length manuscripts. As such, practitioners should use caution when altering clinical practice based solely on conference presentations. Additionally, podium presentations are more likely to be published than poster presentations. This trend may be reflective of the higher quality of abstracts accepted as podiums, or may be associated with a larger number of lower-quality abstracts being accepted because of the use of the e-poster format.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Publication Rates in Podium and Poster Presentations at the 2012-2014 American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Annual Meetings

BACKGROUND

Subspecialty conferences are an important forum for disseminating the latest research relevant to clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to identify publication rates in podium and poster abstracts for the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons (AAHKS) Annual Meeting and to identify the most common journals of publication and the reasons for nonpublication.

METHODS

Six hundred ten accepted abstracts (182 podium presentations, 428 posters) from the 2012-2014 AAHKS meetings were searched using Google, Google Scholar, and PubMed. If an abstract could not be found after efforts by multiple searchers, the first author was emailed to determine where the research was published or why it was not published. For articles that were published, the journal, time to publication, and journal impact factor were noted.

RESULTS

The overall rate of publication was 71% (436/610). Podium presentations (164/182, 90%) were published at a higher rate than posters (271/428, 63%). The most common journal of publication was the Journal of Arthroplasty (218/436, 50%), followed by Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (77/436, 18%) and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (40/436, 9%). Average time to publication was 14.5 months (range, -4 to 44 months) from the date of the conference in which it was presented.

CONCLUSION

Presentations at the AAHKS annual meeting have an impressive rate of publication. The research presented at the meeting is impactful and high quality, warranting consideration for future publication.

Do we publish what we preach? Analysis of the European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow Congress publication rates

Background

Scientific congresses have become the most expedient method to communicate novel findings on any research topic. However, an important question is whether this information will be published in peer-reviewed journals. Our aim was to determine the publication rate of the abstracts presented at the European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow Congress and analyze factors that may influence this rate.

Methods

A total of 398 abstracts reported in the Abstract Book from the 2008 European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow Congress were examined and categorized by oral and poster presentations, topic, and the number of authors listed. A search in PubMed and Google Scholar for subsequent peer-reviewed publications was performed in September 2015. The time to publication after the meeting had been held; the type of journal and its impact factor at the time to publication were recorded for those abstracts that reached peer-reviewed journal publication.

Results

The overall publication rate for the 2008 European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow oral and poster presentations was 45.20% after 7 years. The mean time to publication was 18.53 months, and the mean impact factor value was 2.32. Oral presentations were significantly better represented in journals than posters (64.40 vs. 35.40%, p < 0.001). Abstracts with a greater number of authors listed had better publication rates (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Less than half of the oral presentations and posters at the 21st European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow Congress were published in peer-reviewed journals. Oral presentations with a higher number of authors had an increased likelihood of being published.

Publication rates of podium presentations at the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons annual open versus closed meetings 2008 to 2012

Aim

The purpose of this study was to analyze the publication rate for abstracts presented at podium presentations from the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) annual open and closed meetings from 2008 to 2012.

Materials and methods

Abstracts accepted as podium presentations for the open and closed meetings from 2008 through 2012 were followed. A search was performed using Google Scholar and PubMed for all published manuscripts. This analysis looks at abstracts categorized based on annual meeting (open versus closed) and by meeting year (2008–2012). Data including publication journal, publication date, and level of evidence were recorded. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and odds ratios were performed with p < 0.05 significance.

Results

A total of 365 abstracts were accepted to the open and closed annual meetings from 2008 to 2012, with 49% and 51% presented in open and closed forums. A total of 222 (61%) were published within 3-years in peer-reviewed journals. No difference existed in 3-year publication rate between open and closed podium presentation meetings (112/178, 63% open; 110/187, 59% closed; p = 0.4229); however, presentations at closed meetings were more likely to be published after 3-years compared to open meetings (2/178, 2% open; 15/187, 12% closed; p = 0.002). Most common journal of publication was the Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (JSES) (50%).

Conclusions

Podium abstracts presented at the open and closed annual meetings have publication rates of 63% and 59% with overall combined publication rates of 61% from 2008 to 2012. The high publication rate and high impact of publications speak to the exemplary educational value of ASES annual meetings.

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.

Publication Rates of Podium Presentation Abstracts at the Arthroscopy Association of North America Annual Meetings 2004-2012

PURPOSE

To determine the publication rates of podium presentation abstracts at the Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA) annual scientific meetings from 2004 to 2012.

METHODS

A database of podium presentation abstracts at the annual meetings of the AANA was compiled. Abstract presentations that reached manuscript publication were determined by a PubMed search of the MEDLINE database and Google Scholar. The journal and publication date were then recorded for all identified published abstracts.

RESULTS

A total of 658 abstracts were selected for podium presentations at AANA annual meetings from 2004-2012 (range, 53-102 per year). Of these 658 abstracts, 443 (67.3%) went on to eventual publication in peer-reviewed journals. The mean time from the meeting to publication was 20.0 months. Most abstracts were published within 3 years of the meeting (n = 380, 85.8%), with a significant number of published abstracts reaching publication before the time of the meeting (n = 41, 9.3%). Published abstracts were most frequently published in Arthroscopy (n = 186, 42.0%), The American Journal of Sports Medicine (20.3%), and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (6.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall publication rate of podium presentations at AANA annual meetings (67.3%) was similar to publication rates for other major orthopaedic annual meetings. Most published abstracts (85.8%) were published within 3 years, and the mean time to publication was 20.0 months.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The rates of publication of podium presentations at AANA annual meetings show the impact and importance of these meetings in the advancement of orthopaedic research.

Publication Rates of Podium Versus Poster Presentations at the Arthroscopy Association of North America Meetings 2008-2012

PURPOSE

To analyze the publication rate of poster and podium presentations at Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA) annual meetings from 2008 to 2012.

METHODS

An online search using PubMed and Google Scholar for all published manuscripts associated with abstracts presented from 2008 to 2012 AANA annual meetings was performed. Abstracts were classified by presentation type (poster vs podium), and the journal and publication date were recorded for all published abstracts. Descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and Fisher's exact tests were performed, with P < .05 considered significant.

RESULTS

A total of 1,508 abstracts were submitted to AANA annual meetings from 2008 to 2012, with 976 abstracts accepted for presentation (65% overall acceptance rate). There were 328 podium (22% acceptance rate) and 648 poster (43% acceptance rate) presentations. Of the 976 accepted abstracts, 479 (49%) were published within 3 years in peer-reviewed journals. The overall publication rates for podium and poster presentations were 59% (n = 193) and 44% (n = 286), respectively. Podium presentations were significantly more likely to be published within 3 years compared with poster presentations (P < .0001; odds ratio 1.8095, confidence interval 1.3826-2.3682). There were no differences in time to publication between podium and poster presentations (1.3 ± 1.2 vs 1.1 ± 1.3 years, P = .0633). Over the 5-year study period, the overall abstract acceptance rate (P < .0001) and the rate of abstracts accepted for poster presentation (P < .0001) increased significantly over time, whereas there was no increase in the rate of abstracts accepted for podium presentation (P = .5638). The most common journals of publication were Arthroscopy (n = 157, 32.7%) followed by American Journal of Sports Medicine (n = 93, 19.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall publication rate of abstracts presented at AANA annual meetings is 49%, with podium presentations 1.8 times more likely to be published than poster presentations. The overall abstract acceptance rate and the rate of abstracts accepted for poster presentation increased significantly over time, whereas there was no significant increase in the rate of abstracts accepted for podium presentation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The publication rates of abstracts presented at the AANA annual meetings demonstrate the meetings' impact and importance to the advancement of the scientific literature.

Publications Rates for Podium and Poster Presentations from the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society

BACKGROUND

National orthopaedic meetings are used to disseminate current research through podium and poster abstract presentations. Not all of these abstracts go on to full-text journal publication. The purpose of this study was to determine the publication rates of podium and poster presentations from the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) annual meetings between 2008 and 2012.

METHODS

All accepted podium and poster abstracts from the 2008-2012 AOFAS annual meetings were compiled from the AOFAS office, Physician Resource Center website, and hardcopy meeting programs. PubMed and Google Scholar searches were performed for journal publications using key words in the presentation abstracts and authors' names. Full-text journal publication rates for the presentations were calculated per year, as were the most common journals of publication.

RESULTS

Overall full-text publication rate was 73.7% for podium presentations and 55.8% for posters. Podium presentations were published in a journal significantly more often than posters ( P < .0001; odds ratio 2.17 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.64-2.86]). The mean time to publication was 1.5 and 1.4 years for podium and poster presentations, respectively ( P = .124). The most common journal for podium and poster publications was Foot & Ankle International.

CONCLUSION

Podium abstracts were significantly more likely to be published compared to posters. The AOFAS overall full-text journal publication rate was one of the higher reported rates compared with other national orthopedic society meetings, which have ranged from 34% to 73%.

Does the Level of Evidence of Paper Presentations at the Arthroscopy Association of North America Annual Meetings From 2006-2010 Correlate With the 5-Year Publication Rate or the Impact Factor of the Publishing Journal?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of paper (podium) presentations at the 2006-2010 Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA) annual scientific meetings that were ultimately published in a peer-reviewed journal. Furthermore, we aimed to evaluate whether the level of evidence correlated with the publication rate of these presentations or the impact factor (IF) of the publishing journal.

METHODS

Paper presentations from the 2006-2010 AANA annual meetings were included for evaluation. Clinical studies were graded for quality using the level of evidence by 2 independent reviewers. A comprehensive strategy was used to search the databases PubMed, Medline, and Embase for publications in scientific journals that corresponded to the presentations and were published within 5 years of the presentation date.

RESULTS

Three hundred twenty-eight presentations were evaluated. Overall, 179 peer-reviewed publications corresponding to particular meeting presentations were identified, for a 5-year publication rate of 55%. There was no correlation between the publication rate and the level of evidence (P = .836), the type of study (P = .628), or the joint of focus (P = .07) of the presentations. The mean IF of journals that published Level I studies (4.8 [standard error, 2.3]) was significantly higher than the mean IF of journals that published Level II, III, or IV studies (2.58 [standard error, 0.10]) (P = .017).

CONCLUSIONS

Between 2006 and 2010, presentations of the highest level of evidence at AANA meetings were subsequently published at a similar rate to presentations of lower levels of evidence, albeit in journals with higher IFs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study is an important initial evaluation of the ultimate clinical impact of AANA meeting presentations. The study type, joint of focus, and level of evidence of the presentations all had no correlation with the rate at which these presentations were ultimately published.

Five-year publication rate of clinical presentations at the open and closed American shoulder and elbow surgeons annual meeting from 2005-2010

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the five-year publication rate of papers presented at both the open and closed American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons' (ASES) annual meetings from 2005 to 2010.

METHODS

Online abstracts of the presentations at the open and closed ASES annual meetings were independently screened for clinical studies and graded for quality using level of evidence. The databases PubMed (MEDLINE), Ovid (MEDLINE), and EMBASE were comprehensively searched for full-text publications corresponding to these presentations and any paper published within five years of the presentation date was counted.

RESULTS

Overall, 131/266 papers corresponding to the meeting presentations were identified for a five-year publication rate of 49.2 %. Sixty two (48 %) of the papers were published in The Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, 23 (18 %) were published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine, and 20 (16 %) were published in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. The mean patient sample size included in presentations with a subsequent full-text publication was higher (154; standard error =27) than the presentations not published (93; standard error = 13) (p = 0.039). There was no correlation (p = 0.248) between the publication rate and the level of evidence of the presentations.

CONCLUSIONS

The publication rate of presentations at ASES meetings from 2005 to 2010 is similar to that reported from other orthopaedic meetings. Studies with large sample sizes should continue to be encouraged, and high quality presentations must consistently be followed up with full-text manuscript preparation in order to maximize the future clinical impact.