Association Between Study Quality and Publication Rates of Medical Education Abstracts Presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine Annual Meeting |
| |
| Authors: | Adam P. Sawatsky Thomas J. Beckman Jithinraj Edakkanambeth Varayil Jayawant N. Mandrekar Darcy A. Reed Amy T. Wang |
| |
| Affiliation: | .Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN USA ;.Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN USA ;.Division of Primary Care Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN USA ;.Division of General Internal Medicine, Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA USA |
| |
| Abstract: | BackgroundStudies reveal that 44.5 % of abstracts presented at national meetings are subsequently published in indexed journals, with lower rates for abstracts of medical education scholarship.ObjectiveWe sought to determine whether the quality of medical education abstracts is associated with subsequent publication in indexed journals, and to compare the quality of medical education abstracts presented as scientific abstracts versus innovations in medical education (IME).DesignRetrospective cohort study.ParticipantsMedical education abstracts presented at the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) 2009 annual meeting.Main MeasuresPublication rates were measured using database searches for full-text publications through December 2013. Quality was assessed using the validated Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).Key ResultsOverall, 64 (44 %) medical education abstracts presented at the 2009 SGIM annual meeting were subsequently published in indexed medical journals. The MERSQI demonstrated good inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation range, 0.77–1.00) for grading the quality of medical education abstracts. MERSQI scores were higher for published versus unpublished abstracts (9.59 vs. 8.81, p = 0.03). Abstracts with a MERSQI score of 10 or greater were more likely to be published (OR 3.18, 95 % CI 1.47–6.89, p = 0.003). ). MERSQI scores were higher for scientific versus IME abstracts (9.88 vs. 8.31, p < 0.001). Publication rates were higher for scientific abstracts (42 [66 %] vs. 37 [46 %], p = 0.02) and oral presentations (15 [23 %] vs. 6 [8 %], p = 0.01).ConclusionsThe publication rate of medical education abstracts presented at the 2009 SGIM annual meeting was similar to reported publication rates for biomedical research abstracts, but higher than publication rates reported for medical education abstracts. MERSQI scores were associated with higher abstract publication rates, suggesting that attention to measures of quality—such as sampling, instrument validity, and data analysis—may improve the likelihood that medical education abstracts will be published.KEY WORDS: medical education, medical education research, quality, publication |
| |
| Keywords: | |
|
|
