The publication rates of presentations at major Spine Specialty Society meetings (NASS, SRS, ISSLS)

STUDY DESIGN: A review of all the presentations at three major spine specialty meetings held over a 3-year period. OBJECTIVES: To determine the rate of publication in peer-reviewed journals after presentations at major spine meetings conducted annually by the following three organizations: North American Spine Society (NASS), Scoliosis Research Society (SRS), and International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine (ISSLS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The rate of publication for presentations at national and international meetings has been determined for medical and surgical subspecialties. This rate has been used to judge the quality of the content of the meetings and to determine the validity of the research presentations. METHODS: All presentations either in poster or oral presentation form were entered into a database covering a 3-year period for spine specialty meetings conducted annually by the following three organizations: NASS 1990 to 1992, SRS 1991 to 1993, and ISSLS 1991 to 1993. A computer search for each abstract was performed with the Melvyl Medline Plus database to determine if the abstract had been published in a peer-reviewed journal from 1990 to the end of 1997. Publication rates for presentations at these three meetings were determined over a 3-year period. RESULTS: A total of 1186 abstracts were listed over a 3-year period in the final programs of these three meetings for the years 1991 to 1993 (SRS, ISSLS) and 1990 to 1992 (NASS). Of these 1186 abstracts, 516 were published in peer-reviewed journals, giving an overall publication rate of 43.5%. The publication rates for the three different meetings (NASS, SRS, ISSLS) were similar, with values of 40%, 47%, and 45% respectively. More than 90% of the publications resulting from these meetings were published within a period of 4 years from the data of the meeting. CONCLUSIONS: The publication rates of presentations at three major spine specialty meetings are high and quite comparable with the publication rates of meetings in other medical subspecialties. This reflects the high quality of the meeting programs and validates their selection process.     

Publication rate of abstracts presented at the British Association of Urological Surgeons Annual Meeting

OBJECTIVE: To determine the number of peer-reviewed publications arising from the abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS), and to assess urological trainees' attitudes to research in relationship to the pursuit of Specialist Registrar (SpR) training numbers and their perception of academic urology in the UK. METHODS: Publications resulting from presentations at the annual meetings of the BAUS 2001 and 2002 were searched for using the PubMed database. Variables that might influence the subsequent publication of abstracts in peer-reviewed journals were analysed. Whether institutions from other countries had similar publication rates to those in the UK was also assessed. SpRs were interviewed about their motivation to convert presentations to publications before and after their appointment to SpR training. RESULTS: In July 2004, 142 of 449 abstracts presented at BAUS 2001 and 2002 were published, giving a publication rate of approximately 42% on Kaplan-Meier analysis. The rate of publication appeared to continue to the end of the period of searching for publications. The publication rate arising from UK presentations was lower than that from the non-UK presentations (hazard ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.49-1.15, P = 0.14). Publication rates from podium and poster presentations were similar. Urology journals accounted for 75% of the publications. Of the SpRs evaluated, 83% did research and presented papers to obtain a training number rather than because of an inherent interest to pursue an academic career. CONCLUSIONS: The conversion rate from BAUS presentation to peer-reviewed publication at 36 months was similar on Kaplan-Meier analysis to that of the American Urological Association (AUA, 38%). Interestingly, the rate of publication from the AUA seems to be faster than from BAUS. In addition, presentations from outside the UK appeared to be published faster than those from the UK. Delegates attending these conferences need to consider this when deciding whether a particular presentation will influence their practice. British urology requires academics who are interested in pursuing high-quality research, and which is presented at major conferences with an intention to publish it in peer-reviewed journals.     

Publication rates of abstracts presented at annual musculoskeletal tumor society meetings

Beware of the unpublished abstract! What is the publication rate of abstracts presented at Musculoskeletal Tumor Society meetings, and how does this compare with other orthopaedic and medical meetings? Three hundred thirty-six podium presentations from six annual meetings were identified and their publication was searched at a minimum of 3 years after the event. An effort was made to determine what percent of these abstracts eventually were published in a peer-reviewed journal. It was determined that 137 abstracts were published for a publication rate of 41%. The average time between presentation at the meeting and publication was 21.8 plus or minus 13.5 months. The published articles appeared in 48 peer-reviewed journals. The rate of publication and time until publication was similar to other orthopaedic meetings and to other medical disciplines. Changes to the cohort, title, or authors occurred in approximately (1/3) of the published articles compared with the abstracts. These results suggest that for various reasons the majority of presented material at Musculoskeletal Tumor Society meetings may not survive peer review and may not be scientifically valid.     

AANA21: Reflections on the Combined AOSSM–AANA 2021 Annual Meeting

At the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM)–Arthroscopy Association of North America (AANA) 2021 Annual Meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, collaboration was the word of the day. AAOSM and AANA are a great pair, and many of us are long-time members of both associations. The attendance was unprecedented. Face-to-face meetings facilitate great spontaneity, profound exchange, nuanced communication, personal sharing, and efficient and passionate occurrence of new ideas. President Mark Getelman will host next year’s AANA Annual Meeting, AANA22, in another fantastic American city with which AANA is very familiar, San Francisco, California. The meeting will be held May 19-21, 2022, and we look forward to seeing many of you in the City by the Bay. It will be AANA’s 40th Annual Meeting, and naturally, your editors are planning to attend.     

Podium versus poster publication rates at the Orthopaedic Trauma Association

Original studies at orthopaedic meetings are presented on the podium and in poster format. Publication of those studies in peer-reviewed journals is the standard of communicating scientific data to colleagues. Investigators of previous studies have reported publication rates, but never differentiated between the modes of presentation. We evaluated the annual meeting of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association from 1994-1998 and found that studies presented on the podium were 1.3 times more likely to be published than those presented in a poster format (67% versus 52%). The mean time to publication was similar, 21.6 months for poster presentations and 24.8 months for podium presentations. Podium presentations were more likely to be published in the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, and the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American and British editions). Our findings suggest different rates and distribution of publication between podium and poster presentations at an international trauma meeting. These findings should be considered when evaluating studies of interest at the Orthopaedic Trauma Association meeting.     

Are Abstracts Presented at the EAU Meeting Followed by Publication in Peer-Reviewed Journals?: A Critical Analysis

PURPOSE: Our goal was to assess the rate and time-course of peer-reviewed publication of abstracts presented at the European Association of Urology (EAU) Annual Meeting and to identify factors predictive of publication. METHODS: All abstracts accepted for presentation at the 2000 and 2001 EAU annual meetings were identified from the related published supplements in European Urology. The subsequent publication rate was estimated for the corresponding studies based on a scan of Medline covering a 5-year period following the meetings. We examined whether the following factors were associated with publication rate: research type, study subject, and country of origin. The analysis was performed using logistic regression of the dichotomous variable of publication versus non-publication and the candidate factors. RESULTS: Overall, 47.3% of 1406 abstracts presented at the EAU meetings were followed by publication in peer-reviewed journals. Pre-clinical research studies were more likely to be published than clinical studies (53.3% vs 45%, p<0.05). Prospective series were more likely to be published than retrospective ones (46.5% vs 32.2%, p<0.05). Studies presented at the meetings were mostly from Europe (74.2%). Mean time to publication was 8.6 months, and in most cases, the reports were published in The Journal of Urology and European Urology. The mean IF of journals where papers were published was 1.95. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of the abstracts presented at the EAU are ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals, usually within 2 years after presentation. The publication rate differs significantly according to country of origin, study subject, and research type.     

Publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meeting of the orthopaedic research society

Although the timely conveyance of information at national meetings like those of the Orthopaedic Research Society is critical to the dissemination of new scientific research, the ultimate goal of most researchers is to publish work in peer-reviewed journals referenced in Medline. All of the abstracts that were presented at the podium at the 1991. 1992. and 1993 annual meetings of the Orthopaedic Research Society and printed in the appropriate yearly transactions were included in this study (n = 888, 296 per year). A detailed computerized Medline search of each author on the abstract and the appropriate keywords from the title was performed until a publication was found; otherwise, the abstract was excluded. The database was searched through June 30. 1997. A total of 463 (52%) of the abstracts were published by July 1, 1997. The percentages for each individual year were similar: 148 (50%) were published in 1991,162 (55%) in 1992, and 153 (52%) in 1993. Publication of the majority of these papers (93.1%, 431 of 463) occurred within 4 years of the respective meeting. The Journal of Orthopaedic Research published the majority of these papers (17.5%), followed by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American), the Journal of Biomechanics, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, and Spine (each 5.2%). No significant differences in the rate of publication were observed between papers of 10 broad subject categories (p = 0.103). These results are similar to those from other basic science meetings and to the recently reported results for the annual meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.     

What is the ultimate fate of presented abstracts? The conversion rates of presentations to publications over a five-year period from three North American plastic surgery meetings

BACKGROUND:

Advancements in clinical decision-making are influenced by presentations made at scientific conferences or publications in journals with extensive readership. However, many ideas shared at annual conferences fail to be published, and most surgeons attend these meetings only sporadically.

OBJECTIVE:

To quantify the conversion rates of meeting presentations to publications in North American plastic surgery.

METHODS:

MEDLINE (OvidSP) and PubMed databases were cross-referenced with abstracts accepted for podium presentation at the Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and American Association of Plastic Surgeons annual meetings from 2003 to 2007. Parameters reviewed included publication rate, time to publication, subspecialty, trial type, publication journal and journal impact factor.

RESULTS:

Over the five-year study period, 45.00% of the 888 presentations were published in peer-reviewed journals. The mean time to publication was 22 months (range 1.00 to 85.90 months). In total, 57.00% of the 400 publications appeared in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery; 47.20% of publications were case series study design. The majority of publications were of the reconstruction subspecialty (31.00%). Abstracts from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons had the highest conversion rate (57.70%). Publications based on abstracts presented at the American Association of Plastic Surgeons had the highest mean journal impact factor (2.33). The Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons had the highest total number of publications (n=161).

CONCLUSIONS:

From the three North American annual general meetings reviewed, there was a modest conversion rate of mainly reconstructive case series published predominantly in a single journal, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Several years often pass from the genesis of a research hypothesis to final publication, and because the majority of presentations fail to be published, presentations should be observed with a critical eye given the more stringent peer review process and time required for final publication. In an effort to improve conversion rates, departments and faculty members must foster a culture that prioritizes publication.     

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

PURPOSE: To estimate the acceptance rate of peer-reviewed journals, to describe the time course of subsequent full publication, and to identify those with characteristics associated with publication of the abstracts presented at the World Congress of Endourology (WCE). METHODS: All abstracts accepted for presentation at the 2001 and 2002 WCE meetings were identified from the published supplements to the Journal of Endourology. The subsequent publication rate for the corresponding studies was evaluated by scanning MEDLINE for the 5-year period after the meetings. RESULTS: Overall, 20.5% of the abstracts were followed by publication in peer-reviewed journals. Abstracts on transurethral, laparoscopic, and percutaneous procedures had the highest publication rates (25.5%, 25%, and 24.3%, respectively). Studies from North America had the highest publication rate (29.2%). The mean time to publication was 14.6 months. There was an 80% chance that an eventually published abstract was in print 2 years after presentation. The largest number of the reports were published in the Journal of Endourology (75 of 234; 32%), the official publication of the society that sponsors the WCE. CONCLUSIONS: Only one fifth of the abstracts presented at the WCE are ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals. Attendees should be aware of this limitation, and scientific committees should be encouraged to be more selective. Although presentation at major urological congresses constitutes an invaluable method for rapid scientific dissemination, abstracts contain data that usually are difficult to access and of questionable validity. In this respect, investigators are encouraged to publish their data.     

Publication Rate of Abstracts Presented at the Shoulder and Elbow Session of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery

Many shoulder and elbow abstracts presented at the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) annual meeting are cited in the orthopaedic literature or are used to guide orthopaedic practice, but not all of these abstracts are submitted, survive peer review, or eventually are published. Presuming unpublished works have not been scientifically confirmed, one could question whether it is academically responsible to cite abstracts presented at the AAOS before they are peer-reviewed and published. To partly address this issue we determined the peer-reviewed publication rate for 558 abstracts (233 papers and 325 posters) presented at the shoulder and elbow sessions of the AAOS from 1999 to 2004. In April 2007, we searched the computerized database MEDLINE and PubMed for published articles based on these abstracts. We examined the published articles to assess publication rate, time to publication, change in contents, change in authors, and change in conclusions of abstracts. The overall publication rate in peer-reviewed journals was 58% (321 of 558), similar to other orthopaedic meetings and medical disciplines. We believe it is unacceptable to cite shoulder and elbow abstracts submitted to the AAOS because only slightly more than (1/2) (58%) of them are authenticated scientifically.     

Publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meeting of the American Urological Association

OBJECTIVE: To determine the rate and time-course of peer-reviewed publication of abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the American Urological Association (AUA). METHODS: All abstracts presented at the annual meetings of the AUA from 1998 to 2000 were searched in the PubMed database. To assess any significant predictors of ultimate peer-reviewed publication, abstract number, meeting year, presentation type (podium vs poster), type of research (basic vs clinical), date of publication and session name (i.e. prostate cancer: advanced) were entered into a database. RESULTS: The overall rate of publication was 37.8%. Survival analysis indicated that most abstracts were published within 2 years of their respective meetings. Univariate and multivariate techniques showed that none of the tested covariates were significant predictors of publication. CONCLUSIONS: Information presented at the AUA annual meetings should be carefully considered by physicians before implementation into their clinical practice. Researchers are encouraged to publish their data.     

DOES PRESENTATION AT THE REGISTRARS’ PAPERS DAY PREDICT FUTURE PUBLICATION?

There are research requirements for trainees to be eligible to present for their final examinations (Fellowship of Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, FRACS). One option is the presentation of a paper or poster at a meeting of which abstracts are subject to review and selection. This includes presentation at the annual Registrars' Papers Day (RPD) in New South Wales. There has been some debate surrounding whether research requirements are fulfilled by presentation at such meetings. Publication in a peer-reviewed journal should be the ultimate aim. A high publication rate will validate the quality of the meeting. All abstracts submitted to the RPD in 1998 and 1999 were analysed. A Medline search was performed in 2005 to identify publication of these presentations in a peer-reviewed journal. Variables of the study that were potentially predictive of subsequent publication were analysed. This included type of presentation, surgical specialty, clinical or laboratory-based study, study design (prospective or retrospective) and sample size. Chi-squared test with Yates' continuity correction was used to compare two independent proportions and significance was set at P < 0.05. The publication rates were: oral presentations 50% (17/34), poster presentations 39% (9/23) and rejected presentations 20% (2/10). The mean and median time to publication was 23.8 and 21.0 months. Prospective design was the only variable identified to have a statistically significant effect on the publication rate (P < 0.002). The most common publishing journal was the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery (12 of 26). Overall consistency (author and study sample consistency) from presentation to publication was 32%. The overall 46% publication rate of this state-based trainees-organized meeting compares favourably with international meetings. The research requirement of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS), which includes presentation at the RPD in New South Wales, produces good quality papers for publication.     

Publication rates of abstracts presented at the 23rd (2013) and 24th (2014) National Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Congresses: We are not improving

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine 1) the publication rates of podium and poster presentations from the 23rd (2013) and the 24th (2014) National Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Congresses in peer-reviewed journals and (2) compare these rates with publication rates from the 20th congress (2007) published previously. The secondary objective was to determine the time lag to publication and compare this data with the data from the 20th congress.MethodsAll abstracts from the scientific programs of the 23rd (2013) and the 24th (2014) National Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Congresses were identified and computerized PubMed searches were conducted to determine whether an abstract had been followed by publication of a full-text article in peer-reviewed journals. The time lag to publication was also noted.ResultsOf the 993 presentation abstracts (302 podium and 691 poster presentations) from the 23rd congress and of the 940 presentation abstracts (310 podium and 630 poster presentations) from the 24th congress, 278 (28%) and 234 (24.9%) were followed by a full-text article in peer-reviewed journals indexed by PubMed, respectively. The rates of publication of the podium and poster presentations were 39.4% (119/302) and 23% (159/691), respectively from the 23rd and 37.7% (117/310) and 18.6% (117/630), respectively from the 24th congresses. The mean time to publication of the abstracts from the 23rd congress was 12.8 ± 18.8 (median: 13, range: −140 to 47) months and the mean time to publication of the abstracts from the 24th congress was 11.1 ± 14.42 (median: 11, range: −73 to 39) months. Fifty (50/278, 18%) abstracts from the 23rd congress (mean −11, range: [−32]−[−1], median −5 months) and 37 (37/234, 15.8%) abstracts from the 24th congress (mean −10.4, range: [−73]−[−1], median −4 months) were published as full-text articles prior to the presentation at the congress.ConclusionThe vast majority of abstracts presented at 23rd (2013) and the 24th (2014) National Turkish Orthopedics and Traumatology Congresses were not followed by publication of a full-text article in peer-reviewed journals. The publication rates of the abstracts presented at these congresses did not improve when compared with the 20th (2007) congress.     

Publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Research projects are frequently presented at national meetings not only to make the data available, but also to further critically evaluate the project. The ultimate goal remains publication of the research. We assessed the publication rate of presentations at 1993-95 annual meetings. METHODS: All presentations at the scientific sessions were searched in the computerized database Melvyl MEDLINE and PubMed. The papers were categorized in 6 broad groups. RESULTS: The overall proportion of presentations that were published was 32%. Clinical papers in pediatrics had the highest publication rate, followed by basic science research in laryngology and plastics. CONCLUSION: The publication rate of 32% is lower than the rate at meetings in other fields, reflecting variability in selection criteria for the presentations and quality of abstracts presented. Basic science presentations did not have a greater publication rate as compared to clinical presentations.     

AANA23 Confirms There is Still a Place for Face-To-Face Meetings

AANA23, or the AANA Annual Meeting, set a high-water mark for our society and its members. Congratulations to all who planned and executed an exceptional educational meeting. Demonstrating that diversity continues to be front of mind, one of the first events of the meeting was the Diversity Session. Recognizing the topic’s importance, next month in Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation (ASMAR), Arthroscopy’s companion online journal, we will publish our second annual special issue devoted to rehabilitation and return to sport, also with a focus on diversity as it relates to sports medicine. The Biologic Association held a comprehensive and clinically relevant 2-day meeting in conjunction with and following AANA23. AANA23 set the stage for a greatly anticipated AANA24 to be held in Boston from May 9 to 11, 2024.     

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

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

Publication rate of General Surgery abstracts presented at the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons Annual Scientific Congress

Background

A commonly used metric for evaluating the quality and impact of presentations at a scientific meeting is the frequency with which the findings presented are published as full research papers in peer‐reviewed journals. The purpose of this study was to determine the full article publication rates of abstract presentations for General Surgery and related sub‐specialities at the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons Annual Scientific Congress (RACS ASC) from 2010 to 2014.

Methods

All General Surgical (including its sub‐speciality groups) abstracts presented at the RACS ASC from 2010 to 2014 were identified from the ANZ Journal of Surgery. We determined the rates of full paper publication, time to publication, journals of publication and specialty rates of conversion. Full article publications were identified using the PubMed, MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases.

Results

A total of 1386 abstracts were identified, of which 356 (26%) were converted to full paper publications. The number of abstracts presented annually increased from 206 in 2010 to 386 in 2014, but the percentage of abstracts converted to full paper publications did not follow any temporal trend. The majority (74%) of full papers were published within 2 years of the abstract presentation.

Conclusion

In total, 26% of General Surgery abstracts presented at the RACS ASC from 2010 to 2014 were converted to full paper publications. This could provide a baseline against which to judge the quality of presentations at other national General Surgical congresses, as well as at future RACS ASC meetings.