Publication of surgical abstracts in full text: a retrospective cohort study

Publication rates of congress abstracts is associated with abstract quality: Evaluation of Turkish National Medical Education Congresses and Symposia between 2010 and 2014 using MERSQI

There are many parameters that could be used to evaluate the quality of scientific meetings such as publication rates of meeting abstracts as full-text articles after the meeting or scoring with validated quality scales/tools that evaluate individual papers, project proposals, or submitted abstracts. This study aimed to determine the full-text publication rates for abstracts presented at Turkish National Medical Education Congresses and Symposia and to assess the quality of given abstracts. Abstracts presented at national medical education congresses and symposia between 2010 and 2014 in Türkiye were evaluated. Initially, the abstracts were evaluated if they were published as full-text articles in international and national peer-reviewed journals following the meeting. Secondly, the quality of presented abstracts was assessed with the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) scale. Overall publication rate for the abstracts was 11.3%. The publication rate of oral and poster presentations were 26.6% and 8.1%, respectively. Oral presentations had a statistically higher publication rate than poster presentations (p = .000). The mean MERSQI score for abstracts was 7.73 ± 2.59. The oral presentations had higher MERSQI mean scores than poster presentations (8.28 ± 2.46 vs. 7.61 ± 2.6; p = .032). Similarly, published abstracts had a significantly higher score compared to unpublished abstracts (10.07 ± 2.74 vs. 7.43 ± 2.41; p = .000). Interestingly, there was no statistical difference between the mean MERSQI scores of the published oral and poster presentations (9.33 ± 2.45 vs. 10.61 ± 2.72; p = .101). This study showed that the main factor for a meeting abstract to be published as a full-text article is the scientific quality of the study. The quality of presentations at annual medical education meetings in Türkiye were low compared with international meetings which did not improve over five years. An institutional policy that would set quality standards for medical education research and increase the awareness of researchers on the topic might help improve the design, execution, and reporting of such studies in Türkiye. The MERSQI could be a valuable tool to monitor the quality of submitted abstracts and to increase the awareness of novice researchers on high quality research.

Charting the course from abstract to published article

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Publication rate of abstracts from presentations at the British Orthodontic Conference 2009–2014

Objective:

The primary objective of this study was to investigate the publication rate of scientific abstracts presented at the British Orthodontic Conference 2009–2014. Predictors of full-text publications after presentation of abstracts were explored.

Design:

Cross-sectional study.

Materials and methods:

Details of abstracts were retrieved from the conference programmes. Abstracts were screened and full-text publications identified by a single author with discrepancies discussed. Two electronic databases were searched to identify full-text publication of abstracts presented at the British Orthodontic Conference during 2009–2014. Study characteristics were recorded in a prespecified data collection sheet. Descriptive and correlation statistics were calculated. Multivariable Cox regression modelling was implemented in order to assess the effect of predictors on the instance of probability of publication.

Results:

A total of 225 abstracts (148 poster presentations and 77 oral presentations) were identified. Observational studies were frequent (60%) and significant results were reported in 38.7% of abstracts. The rate of full-text publication after abstract presentation was 46.2% with a mean time to publication of 18.3 ± 18.7 months. Authors based at both university and hospitals (Hazard ratio: 2.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26–5.47, P=0.01) had a higher instant probability of publication compared to university only, whereas diagnostic studies (Hazard ratio: 0.18, 95% CI 0.04–0.74, P=0.02) had lower instant probability of publication compared to systematic reviews.

Conclusion:

Over 50% of study abstracts presented at the British Orthodontic Conference during 2009–2014 remain unpublished. Author affiliation and study type appear to influence full text publication. In order to reduce publication bias within the literature, publication of full-text articles by authors of presented abstracts is encouraged.

Abstract to Publication in Microsurgery: What Are the Discrepancies?

BACKGROUND

 The American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery (ASRM) annual meeting is a forum to present new research abstracts prior to peer-reviewed publication. The aim of this study is to determine the conversion rate, discrepancies, and time between presentation and publication.

METHODS

 A comprehensive literature search was conducted cross-referencing ASRM abstracts presented between 2014 and 2018 with peer-reviewed manuscripts. The title and authors of the abstract and manuscript, the journal of manuscript publication, and time in months between presentation and publication were recorded. The conversion rate was calculated as the proportion of publications to abstracts. Major discrepancies were defined as changes in the purpose, study design, methods, sample size, statistical analysis, results, or conclusions. Minor discrepancies were defined as changes in the title or authorship.

RESULTS

 Out of 667 oral abstract presentations, 361 (54%) resulted in publication. Of these abstracts, 53 were presented after their corresponding manuscripts were published. The mean conversion rate was 55.52 ± 10.17%. The mean time from presentation to publication was 13.83 months. Minor discrepancies were more frequent than major discrepancies (91 vs. 76%). The most common major and minor discrepancies involved changes in the results (63%) and authorship (79%), respectively. There was a significant association between the year of abstract presentation and whether the conclusion was changed (p = 0.001), but interyear relationships with all other discrepancies failed to reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

 Only around half of abstracts presented at the annual ASRM conference have reached full publication in peer-reviewed journals, and most are undergoing significant changes between presentation and publication. This may be due to panel discussions at meetings suggesting study modifications, as well as revisions after careful peer review. Altering surgical practices may not be recommended based on abstracts' content.

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

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

Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts

BACKGROUND

Abstracts of presentations at scientific meetings are usually available only in conference proceedings. If subsequent full publication of results reported in these abstracts is based on the magnitude or direction of the results, publication bias may result. Publication bias creates problems for those conducting systematic reviews or relying on the published literature for evidence about health and social care.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review reports of studies that have examined the proportion of meeting abstracts and other summaries that are subsequently published in full, the time between meeting presentation and full publication, and factors associated with full publication.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Science Citation Index, reference lists, and author files. The most recent search was done in February 2016 for this substantial update to our earlier Cochrane Methodology Review (published in 2007).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included reports of methodology research that examined the proportion of biomedical results initially presented as abstracts or in summary form that were subsequently published. Searches for full publications had to be at least two years after meeting presentation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated the proportion of abstracts published in full using a random-effects model. Dichotomous variables were analyzed using risk ratio (RR), with multivariable models taking into account various characteristics of the reports. We assessed time to publication using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Combining data from 425 reports (307,028 abstracts) resulted in an overall full publication proportion of 37.3% (95% confidence interval (CI), 35.3% to 39.3%) with varying lengths of follow-up. This is significantly lower than that found in our 2007 review (44.5%. 95% CI, 43.9% to 45.1%). Using a survival analyses to estimate the proportion of abstracts that would be published in full by 10 years produced proportions of 46.4% for all studies; 68.7% for randomized and controlled trials and 44.9% for other studies. Three hundred and fifty-three reports were at high risk of bias on one or more items, but only 32 reports were considered at high risk of bias overall.Forty-five reports (15,783 abstracts) with 'positive' results (defined as any 'significant' result) showed an association with full publication (RR = 1.31; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.40), as did 'positive' results defined as a result favoring the experimental treatment (RR =1.17; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.28) in 34 reports (8794 abstracts). Results emanating from randomized or controlled trials showed the same pattern for both definitions (RR = 1.21; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.32 (15 reports and 2616 abstracts) and RR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.32 (13 reports and 2307 abstracts), respectively.Other factors associated with full publication include oral presentation (RR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.40 to 1.52; studied in 143 reports with 115,910 abstracts); acceptance for meeting presentation (RR = 1.65; 95% CI 1.48 to 1.85; 22 reports with 22,319 abstracts); randomized trial design (RR = 1.51; 95% CI 1.36 to 1.67; 47 reports with 28,928 abstracts); and basic research (RR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.82; 92 reports with 97,372 abstracts). Abstracts originating at an academic setting were associated with full publication (RR = 1.60; 95% CI 1.34 to 1.92; 34 reports with 16,913 abstracts), as were those considered to be of higher quality (RR = 1.46; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.73; 12 reports with 3364 abstracts), or having high impact (RR = 1.60; 95% CI 1.41 to 1.82; 11 reports with 6982 abstracts). Sensitivity analyses excluding reports that were abstracts themselves or classified as having a high risk of bias did not change these findings in any important way.In considering the reports of the methodology research that we included in this review, we found that reports published in English or from a native English-speaking country found significantly higher proportions of studies published in full, but that there was no association with year of report publication. The findings correspond to a proportion of abstracts published in full of 31.9% for all reports, 40.5% for reports in English, 42.9% for reports from native English-speaking countries, and 52.2% for both these covariates combined.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

More than half of results from abstracts, and almost a third of randomized trial results initially presented as abstracts fail to be published in full and this problem does not appear to be decreasing over time. Publication bias is present in that 'positive' results were more frequently published than 'not positive' results. Reports of methodology research written in English showed that a higher proportion of abstracts had been published in full, as did those from native English-speaking countries, suggesting that studies from non-native English-speaking countries may be underrepresented in the scientific literature. After the considerable work involved in adding in the more than 300 additional studies found by the February 2016 searches, we chose not to update the search again because additional searches are unlikely to change these overall conclusions in any important way.

Full-text publication rate of abstracts presented at the Japan Primary Care Association Annual Meetings (2010-2012): a retrospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at the Japan Primary Care Association Annual Meetings and the factors associated with publication.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational study.

PARTICIPANTS

All abstracts presented at the Japan Primary Care Association Annual Meetings (2010-2012).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Publication rates were determined by searching the MEDLINE database for full-text articles published by September 2017. Data on presentation format (oral vs poster), affiliation of the first author, number of authors, number of involved institutions, journal of publication and publication date were abstracted.

RESULTS

Of the 1003 abstracts evaluated, 38 (3.8%, 95% CI 2.6% to 5.0%) were subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the MEDLINE database. The median time to publication was 15.5 months (IQR, 9.3-29.3 months). More than 95% of published abstracts were published within 4 years. The publications appeared in 23 different journals (21 English-language journals and two Japanese-language journals). Based on univariate analysis using binary logistic regression, publication was more frequent for oral presentations (7.3%vs2.0% for poster presentations; OR 3.91,95% CI 1.98 to 7.75), and for first authors affiliated with university-associated institutions (6.4%vs2.4% for first authors affiliated with non-university-associated institutions; OR 2.75,95% CI 1.42 to 5.30). Based on multivariate analysis, oral presentation and first author affiliation with a university-associated institution were still the only independent predictive factors for publication (adjusted OR 3.50(95% CI 1.72 to 7.12) and adjusted OR 2.35(95% CI 1.19 to 4.63), respectively). Even among 151 abstracts presented orally by first authors affiliated with a university-associated institution, only 18 abstracts (11.9%) were subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals.

CONCLUSIONS

The publication rate of abstracts presented at the Japan Primary Care Association Annual Meetings was extremely low. Further studies are warranted to investigate the barriers to publication among investigators who participate in conferences where the publication rate is extremely low.

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.

Three Dimensions of Reproducibility in Natural Language Processing

Despite considerable recent attention to problems with reproducibility of scientific research, there is a striking lack of agreement about the definition of the term. That is a problem, because the lack of a consensus definition makes it difficult to compare studies of reproducibility, and thus to have even a broad overview of the state of the issue in natural language processing. This paper proposes an ontology of reproducibility in that field. Its goal is to enhance both future research and communication about the topic, and retrospective meta-analyses. We show that three dimensions of reproducibility, corresponding to three kinds of claims in natural language processing papers, can account for a variety of types of research reports. These dimensions are reproducibility of a conclusion, of a finding, and of a value. Three biomedical natural language processing papers by the authors of this paper are analyzed with respect to these dimensions.

Publication rate of abstracts presented at Japan Geriatrics Society Annual Meetings (2011-2012): a retrospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at Japan Geriatrics Society Annual Meetings. Publication rates were determined by searching for full-text publications up to September 2017 in the MEDLINE database. Factors associated with publication were determined.

RESULTS

In total, 618 abstracts presented at Japan Geriatrics Society Annual Meetings (2011-2012) were included. Of those, 146 (23.6% [95% CI 20.3-27.0%]) were published in peer-reviewed journals indexed in MEDLINE. The median time to publication was 13.0 months (interquartile range 6.0-25.8 months). More than 90% were published within 4 years. The publications appeared in 64 different journals, and 87.0% were published in English-language journals. Multivariable analysis revealed more frequent publication of oral presentations (25.4% vs 16.9% of poster presentations; adjusted OR 1.79 [95% CI 1.05-3.06]), randomized controlled trials (66.7% vs 22.8% for other study designs; adjusted OR 10.79 [95% CI 3.02-38.53]) and studies with n ≥ 100 (28.7% vs 18.4% of studies with n < 100; adjusted OR 1.97 [95% CI 1.32-2.95]). Because more than three-fourths of the abstracts presented at Japan Geriatrics Society Annual Meetings remained unpublished within 5 years after the conferences, additional efforts may be needed to promote their publication.

Full text publication rates of research abstracts presented at the European Society of Endodontology (ESE) Congresses in the last 20 years

AIM

To evaluate the full-text publication rates of scientific research abstracts presented at the European Society of Endodontology (ESE) Congresses held between 1993 and 2013 (a total of 11 occasions) and to determine factors associated with the manuscripts.

METHODOLOGY

An electronic database search was conducted from January 2015 to December 2016 to identify full text English written publications of the research abstracts presented at the last 11 ESE Biennial Congresses from 1993 to 2013. For each occasion, research abstract information were retrieved from the International Endodontic Journal (IEJ) through the official website of the ESE and the following parameters for each abstract presentation were recorded: Year of presentation, first author's affiliation, geographic origin, and type of study. Following full-text article identification, additional information was recorded such as: Year and journal of publication, elapsed time until full publication and number of authors per presentation and publication.

RESULTS

A total of 1165 research abstracts were presented, of which 401 (34.4%) were finally published as full-length articles. Overall 235 articles (58.6%) were published either in the International Endodontic Journal (IEJ, 35.7%) or Journal of Endodontics (JOE, 22.9%). The mean time between abstract presentation and full-text publication was 18.95 months. Munich (2001) had the highest publication rate (44%) whereas Lisbon (2013) had the highest number of published articles (77). Turkey was the country with the highest number of published abstracts (56). However, the Netherlands was the country with the highest number of publications related to the number of presentations (21/26) (80.7%). Differences in authorship between presentation and full publication were found in 179 (44.6%) articles.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial number of research abstracts presented at ESE congresses were not published in peer reviewed journals. Authors prefer to publish their research papers in international journals with high impact factor. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The Publication Rates of Pediatric Rheumatology Abstracts Presented in European League Against Rheumatism 2009 Congress

Objectives

This study aims to evaluate the publication rates and features of the abstracts related to pediatric rheumatology presented in European League against Rheumatism 2009 congress.

Patients and methods

A systematic search was performed to find full-text publications of abstracts related to pediatric rheumatology in European League against Rheumatism 2009 congress. Full-text publication rate, the elapsed time between presentation and full-text publication, type of the disease in the studies, distribution of abstracts and full-texts according to countries, journals, and presentation types were investigated.

Results

Totally 220 abstracts were detected related to pediatric rheumatology. Twenty-two of them had only the title, authors' names, and institution of origin, but no abstract. Therefore, a total number of 198 abstracts were evaluated. Eighty-six (43.4%) abstracts were found to be accepted as full-text articles. The elapsed time between presentation and full text publication was median 19 months (range 0 to 64 months). While 12 orally presented abstracts (34%) became full-text articles, this rate was 45% (74 abstracts) for poster presentations. There was no significant difference in the elapsed time to reach full-text publication and impact factors between presentation types (p=0.832 and p=0.053, respectively).

Conclusion

The full-text publication rates were within similar ranges when compared to other reports in rheumatology field. It seems that even though European League against Rheumatism is a general rheumatology congress, it takes an important place in pediatric rheumatology field as well.

Discrepancies Between Plastic Surgery Meeting Abstracts and Subsequent Full-Length Manuscript Publications

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this bibliometric study was to assess the discrepancies between plastic surgery meeting abstracts and subsequent full-length manuscript publications.

METHODS

Abstracts presented at the Brazilian Congress of Plastic Surgery from 2010 to 2011 were compared with matching manuscript publications. Discrepancies between the abstract and the subsequent manuscript were categorized as major (changes in the purpose, methods, study design, sample size, statistical analysis, results, and conclusions) and minor (changes in the title and authorship) variations.

RESULTS

The overall discrepancy rate was 96 %, with at least one major (76 %) and/or minor (96 %) variation. There were inconsistencies between the study title (56 %), authorship (92 %), purpose (6 %), methods (20 %), study design (36 %), sample size (51.2 %), statistical analysis (14 %), results (20 %), and conclusions (8 %) of manuscripts compared with their corresponding meeting abstracts.

CONCLUSION

As changes occur before manuscript publication of plastic surgery meeting abstracts, caution should be exercised in referencing abstracts or altering surgical practices based on abstracts' content.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

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.

Publication rate of studies presented at veterinary anaesthesia specialty meetings during the years 2003-2008

OBJECTIVE

To assess publication rates, factors predicting publication, and discrepancies between conference abstracts and subsequent full-text publications of abstracts from the veterinary meetings of the American College of Veterinary Anesthesiologists and the Association of Veterinary Anaesthetists from 2003 to 2008.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

A total of 607 abstracts were identified and a database search (Scopus, PubMed, CAB) was conducted to identify matching publications. Authors of nonmatching abstracts were contacted to participate in a confidential online survey. Risk ratios were used to assess factors predicting publication and these were tested for significance (p < 0.05) using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

The overall publication rate was 63.3% and the mean (± SD) time to publication was 25 ± 19 months. Factors significantly associated with subsequent full publication (i.e. publication of a full manuscript in a peer-reviewed journal) were continent of origin (North America), study design (experimental studies), specialty (analgesia) and the presence of a source of funding. The principal reasons why studies remained unpublished were lack of time and responsibility lying with co-authors. Minor changes compared with the original abstract were found in 71.6% of all publications. Major changes were noted in 34.6% and the outcome of the study changed in 7.6%.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These data suggest that some of the abstracts reported preliminary findings. Therefore, caution is warranted when quoting abstracts as references in scientific publications. To date, major veterinary journals have not issued recommendations in their author guidelines addressing the use of abstracts as a reference. The authors propose the inclusion of such a statement in author guidelines.

From Poster Presentation to Publication: National Congress of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

INTRODUCTION

The aims of this study were as follows: 1) to determine publication rate, time to publication, and study design of poster presentations accepted at the National Congress of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (NCCAP) and converted to publication and the degree of first author in a published article and journal index and 2) to investigate the relationship of these data with each other.

METHODS

The poster presentations of four congresses organized between 2005 and 2008 were investigated separately. The presentations were screened by taking into account the title and the first and second author in English and Turkish languages via PubMed and Google Academic databases. Published studies, time between presentation and publishing date, study design, degree of first author, and journal index of these studies were recorded.

RESULTS

Fifty-four (25.2%) of 214 poster presentations were published in international and national peer-reviewed journals. Of the published articles, 74.1% (n=40) were research type and 61.1% (n=33) were found in the Science Citation Index (SCI) and Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E) peer-reviewed journals. The first author in 42.6% (n=23) of published articles were assistant professors. The average time between presentation and publishing date was 30.72±18.89 months. Statistical differences were not determined between publication rate and study design; between time to publication and study type/study design, degree of first author, and journal index; and between journal index and study design and degree of first author (p>0.05). It was found that research articles were published significantly more by teaching staff than experts and other researchers (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared with literature data, it was found that the time to publication was longer while the publication rate was similar for poster presentations in our congresses. Based on these results, it is important to create necessary conditions and encourage the researchers to publish the poster presentations presented in NCCAP.

Quality Evaluation of Abstracts Presented at the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Annual Scientific Meeting

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To examine the rate of abstract publication from the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons Annual Scientific Meeting (SGSASM), 2004 to 2012.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective study in which all abstracts presented at the SGSASM from 2004 to 2012 were reviewed. Information was collected on oral (O), oral poster (OP), and poster (P) presentations. To evaluate for publication, all abstracts were searched for in the US National Library of Medicine's PubMed database. Chi-square tests were used to evaluate whether there were differences in distribution of published studies by first author location and affiliation and number of abstract authors.

DESIGN CLASSIFICATION

Canadian Task Force III.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In total, 867 abstracts were reviewed, including all O, OP, and P presentations. Video and tips and tricks presentations were excluded. Overall rate of publication for all abstracts from 2004 to 2012 was 55.7%, comprising 82.4% for O presentations, 60.9% for OP presentations, and 41.4% for P presentations. There was no significant difference in location for published abstracts (p = .878), although published abstracts had a significantly greater number of authors (p < .001). Abstracts presented by authors from university programs were more likely to be published (p < .001). For all presentation types, the mean number of citations for published abstracts was different for the 9-year period (O, OP, and P: p < .001), with an overall decline toward the end of the assessment period.

CONCLUSION

Over a 9-year period (2004-2012), the rate of abstract publication at the SGSASM was 55.7%, which is similar to other academic meetings. The comparability of this publication rate shows that the abstract selection committee is able to select high-quality research with limited information provided in abstract submissions.

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.

Why are medical and health-related studies not being published? A systematic review of reasons given by investigators

Objective

About half of medical and health-related studies are not published. We conducted a systematic review of reports on reasons given by investigators for not publishing their studies in peer-reviewed journals.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and SCOPUS (until 13/09/2013), and references of identified articles were searched to identify reports of surveys that provided data on reasons given by investigators for not publishing studies. The proportion of non-submission and reasons for non-publication was calculated using the number of unpublished studies as the denominator. Because of heterogeneity across studies, quantitative pooling was not conducted. Exploratory subgroup analyses were conducted.

Results

We included 54 survey reports. Data from 38 included reports were available to estimate proportions of at least one reason given for not publishing studies. The proportion of non-submission among unpublished studies ranged from 55% to 100%, with a median of 85%. The reasons given by investigators for not publishing their studies included: lack of time or low priority (median 33%), studies being incomplete (median 15%), study not for publication (median 14%), manuscript in preparation or under review (median 12%), unimportant or negative result (median 12%), poor study quality or design (median 11%), fear of rejection (median 12%), rejection by journals (median 6%), author or co-author problems (median 10%), and sponsor or funder problems (median 9%). In general, the frequency of reasons given for non-publication was not associated with the source of unpublished studies, study design, or time when a survey was conducted.

Conclusions

Non-submission of studies for publication remains the main cause of non-publication of studies. Measures to reduce non-publication of studies and alternative models of research dissemination need to be developed to address the main reasons given by investigators for not publishing their studies, such as lack of time or low priority and fear of being rejected by journals.

Publication fate of abstracts presented at Society of British Neurological Surgeons meetings

INTRODUCTION

Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS) meetings are important national events which allow for the presentation of current academic work. The publication rate of presented abstracts is considered a proxy marker of the scientific strength of a conference. We aimed to determine the publication fate of presented abstracts at SBNS meetings over a 5-year period.

METHODS

A retrospective review of SBNS conference proceedings between 2001 and 2005 was performed. To ascertain whether an abstract resulted in peer-reviewed publication, a range of databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline and Ovid) were interrogated. Abstracts published in full were subsequently assessed for journal impact factor (IF), time of publication and number of citations received (per Google Scholar).

RESULTS

A total of 494 abstracts were presented. Of these, 181 abstracts were subsequently published in full, giving the conference a publication rate of 36.6%. The mean time to publication from presentation was 22 months (range 35 months pre-presentation to 133 months afterwards). The top three journals for publication were the British Journal of Neurosurgery (23.2%), Neurosurgery (7.7%) and Journal of Neurosurgery (7.7%). The IF of journal destinations ranged from no IF to 38.28 (median=1.97). Number of citations ranged from 0 to 963 (median=22). Abstracts with positive results were significantly more likely to be published in full compared to those with negative results (p=0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

SBNS conferences have a respectable publication rate. Those abstracts that are published in full have gone on to gain a considerable number of citations reflecting their scientific relevance. However, studies presented at SBNS are susceptible to positive outcome bias.

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.

Publication rates of abstracts presented at five national pharmacy association meetings

BACKGROUND

Abstract presentations at professional meetings provide a medium for disseminating the findings of scholarly activity. Rates of abstract publication from various biomedical disciplines have been evaluated, with pharmacy noted to be lower than other specialties. Previous research on pharmacy abstract publication rates was conducted for a limited number of professional meetings but has not been assessed using Google Scholar.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the full publication rate of abstracts presented at the 2005 American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) Spring and Annual Meetings, American Pharmacists Association (APhA) Annual Meeting, and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) Summer and Midyear Clinical Meetings.

METHODS

Publication status was assessed for abstracts presented during the 2005 ACCP Spring and Annual Meetings, APhA Annual Meeting, and ASHP Summer and Midyear Clinical Meetings using PubMed and Google Scholar. Data collected included abstract category, study category, practice site, database(s) in which publication appeared, time in months to publication, publication type, and journal of publication.

RESULTS

Evaluation of 2,000 abstracts presented in 2005 revealed an overall full publication rate of 19.8% (n = 384). Nearly all pharmacy abstracts were published as manuscripts (98.4%; n=378) and indexed in PubMed and Google Scholar (91.9%; n = 353), although a significant percentage were indexed in Google Scholar only (7.8%; n = 30). The mean time to full publication was 16.8 months (SD ±11.9 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Results were consistent with previously reported full publication rates of abstracts from pharmacy association meetings, indicating that abstracts presented at pharmacy meetings continue to have a lower full publication rate than other health disciplines.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

How many presentations are published as full papers?

Background

The publication rate of presentations at medical international meetings has ranged from 11% to 78% with an average of 45%. To date, there are no studies about the final rate of publications at scientific meetings associated with plastic surgery from Korea. The present authors investigated the publication rate among the presentations at meetings associated with plastic surgery.

Methods

The titles and authors of the abstracts from oral and poster presentations were collected from the program books of the Congress of the Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (CKSPRS) for 2005 to 2007 (58th-63rd). All of the abstracts presented were searched for using PubMed, KoreaMed, KMbase, and Google Scholar. The titles, key words from the titles, and the authors' names were then entered in database programs. The parameters reviewed included the publication rate, type of presentation including running time, affiliation, subspecialty, time to publication, and publication journal.

Results

A total of 1,176 abstracts presented at the CKSPRS from 2005 to 2007 were evaluated. 38.7% of the abstracts, of which oral presentations accounted for 41.0% and poster presentations 34.8%, were published as full papers. The mean time to publication was 15.04 months. Among journals of publication, the Journal of the Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons was most used.

Conclusions

Brilliant ideas and innovative approaches are being discussed at CKSPRS. The 38.7% publication rate found from this research appeared a bit lower than the average rate of medical meetings. If these valuable presentations are not available as full papers, the research would be a waste of time and effort.

Discrepancies between Abstracts Presented at International Association for Dental Research Annual Sessions from 2004 to 2005 and Full-Text Publication

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the discrepancies between abstracts presented at the IADR meeting (2004-2005) and their full-text publication. Material and Methods. Abstracts from the Prosthodontic Section of IADR meeting were obtained. The following information was collected: abstract title, number of authors, study design, statistical analysis, outcome, and funding source. PubMed was used to identify the full-text publication of the abstracts. The discrepancies between the abstract and the full-text publication were examined, categorized as major and minor discrepancies, and quantified. The data were collected and analyzed using descriptive analysis. Frequency and percentage of major and minor discrepancies were calculated. Results. A total of 109 (95.6%) articles showed changes from their abstracts. Seventy-four (65.0%) and 105 (92.0%) publications had at least one major and one minor discrepancies, respectively. Minor discrepancies were more prevalent (92.0%) than major discrepancies (65.0%). The most common minor discrepancy was observed in the title (80.7%), and most common major discrepancies were seen in results (48.2%). Conclusion. Minor discrepancies were more prevalent than major discrepancies. The data presented in this study may be useful to establish a more comprehensive structured abstract requirement for future meetings.

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

PURPOSE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Subsequent publication of oral and maxillofacial surgery meeting abstracts

PURPOSE

Previous studies in various medical specialties have shown that fewer than 50% of abstracts presented at meetings are subsequently published. The purpose of the present study was to determine the publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The titles and authors of the abstracts from all oral abstract session presentations and posters by American contributors were collected from the Final Programs of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons annual meetings for 2006 to 2009. A PubMed search for published articles through December 2010 was then performed using the authors' names, abstract titles, and key words.

RESULTS

A total of 311 abstract presentations were done at the 4 annual meetings. Of these, only 85 (24%) were subsequently published. No difference was found between abstracts from oral or poster presentations. Most of the articles were published in the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.

CONCLUSION

Because of deficiencies that can occur in abstracts and the need to disseminate the information they contain, it is important to take the appropriate measures to ensure that full articles are subsequently published.

Knowledge dissemination resulting from the Australian Cardiac Rehabilitation Association annual scientific meetings

BACKGROUND

Publication of scientific work presented at national conferences underpins knowledge translation. However, no such data exists for cardiac rehabilitation abstracts presented at Australian conferences. We reviewed a series of conferences to determine the number of abstracts that resulted in subsequent full publication.

METHODS

Australian Cardiac Rehabilitation Association (ACRA) Conference Proceedings for 2003-2007 were searched for oral and poster author details and abstract titles were searched in multiple databases for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and the results summarised.

RESULTS

In total, 279 abstracts were presented at the five conferences, of which 186 were podium, 83 poster and 10 moderated poster presentations. The majority (42%) of abstracts were from Victoria (n=116), and were dominated by presentations from registered nurses (38%; n=107). Only 17 (9%) were subsequently published as full manuscripts in scientific journals with impact factors ranging from 0.55 to 7.92. The mean time from presentation to complete manuscript publication was 19±21.6 months. The median citation rate of the publications was 2.0 (range 0-12).

CONCLUSIONS

Most abstracts presented at the ACRA scientific meetings were not published as manuscripts in journals. Failure to publish comprises research principles and progress healthcare. There is an urgent need to investigate the reasons for the low publication rates and develop effective strategies to redress the imbalance.

Educational article: what gets accepted for presentation?--a study of submitted abstracts for the 2009 BAOMS Conference

The Annual Scientific Conference of the British Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (BAOMS) provides an opportunity for colleagues to present papers to their peers, which can be beneficial both for professional development and for trainees to enhance their future career prospects. Each year far more abstracts are submitted than slots are available for oral presentation. These abstracts are reviewed by a paper selection committee, made up of several BAOMS colleagues. To our knowledge, there have not been any previous studies that have evaluated whether the type of study submitted (retrospective study, audit, prospective and so on) or the surgical sub-specialty is more likely to be accepted for presentation. Of 237 abstracts submitted for oral presentation at the 2009 conference, 99 were accepted (42% overall acceptance rate). Oncology and salivary gland disease formed the greatest proportion of total submissions (23%) followed by miscellaneous clinical papers (19%). The commonest type of submissions were retrospective studies (19%) followed by case report/series (15%). The greatest acceptance rate in this series was for orthognathic and TMJ papers (P<0.01) while for type of presentation, research/laboratory studies, technical procedures and randomised trials were most likely to be accepted (P<0.01 for all). It is possible that there are a certain number of slots allocated for presentation in each sub-category, which may increase competition in certain areas, but further work is necessary in this area. We recommend some general points for the successful acceptance of abstracts.

Publish or be damned? The fate of abstracts presented at the International Continence Society Meeting 2003

AIMS

This study examined the presented abstracts from the International Continence Society (ICS) Meeting, 2003. It analyzed the rate and timing of full publication, the factors predicting successful publication, the consistency of reporting between presented abstracts and published abstracts, and the barriers to publication.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The abstracts presented at ICS 2003, were categorized according to topic, nationality, and a range of methodological factors. Using keywords and author names, PubMed was searched for published papers corresponding to the work presented. For abstracts that had been published, the original abstract was compared with the abstract accompanying the full-text paper. For abstracts that could not be identified in PubMed, the main authors were surveyed with an email questionnaire, asking about reasons for non-publication.

RESULTS

Of 130 presented abstracts, 77 (61.6%) had been published in full by February 2006. Authors from the US were significantly more likely to have had their work published. Uniquely among topics, "Clinical Pharmacology" abstracts were significantly more likely to have been published. Fourteen (18.2%) abstracts were classified as having major inconsistencies between the presented abstract and the abstract accompanying the full-text paper. Inconsistencies between presented and published abstracts were significantly associated with delay in publication on Kaplan-Meier analysis. Most unpublished abstracts had never been submitted for publication.

CONCLUSIONS

The high publication rate reflects well on the scientific quality of the ICS meeting. All authors should be encouraged to publish their work after presentation. Caution is advised when referencing or generalizing from abstracts that have not been published in full.