Abstract

BackgroundMaterial presented at conferences is meant to provide exposure to ongoing research that could affect medical decision making based on future outcomes. It is important then to evaluate the rates of publication from conference presentations as a measure of academic quality as such research has undergone peer review and journal acceptance. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the fate of abstracts presented at the Skeletal Society of Radiology Annual Meetings from 2010–2015.Materials and MethodsConference abstracts were searched using Google, Google Scholar, and PubMed (which includes Medline) to locate the corresponding published reports. The data recorded for published studies included date published online, in print, or both; the journal in which it was published; and the 5-year journal impact factor. When an abstract was not confirmed as published, authors were contacted by email to verify its publication status or, if not published, the reason for nonpublication.ResultsA total of 162 abstracts were published out of 320 presented (50.6%) at the SSR conferences from 2010 to 2015 with 59.9% (85/142) of publications occurring within two years of the conference date (not counting abstracts published prior to conference). Mean time to publication was 19 months and is calculated by excluding the 20 (12.3%) abstracts that were published prior to the conference date. The median time to publication is 13 months (25th–75th percentile: 6.25–21.75). The top two journals publishing research studies from this conference were Skeletal Radiology and The American Journal of Roentgenology. These journals accepted 72 of the 162 (44.4%) studies for publication. Of the 14 authors who responded with 17 reasons for not publishing, the most common reasons were lack of time (7–41.2%), results not important enough (4–23.5%), publication not an aim (3–17.6%), and lack of resources (3–17.6%).DiscussionAt least half of the abstracts presented at the annual meeting for the Society of Skeletal Radiology are accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The majority (59.9%) of these publications were achieved within two years of the conference presentation. The rate at which presentations are published and the journals that accept the abstracts can potentially be used to compare the importance and quality of information at conferences.

Highlights

  • A 2010 study on the global burden of disease found that the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders was 8.4%; this rate increased to 20–40% in people over the age of 80 years (Smith et al, 2014)

  • The research abstracts submitted to this meeting undergo formal peerreview and while beneficial, evidence suggests that publication rates for conference abstracts are higher for those with positive findings, randomized designs, and larger sample sizes (Scherer, Langenberg & Von Elm, 2007)

  • We evaluate the fate of abstracts presented at the SSR (Skeletal Society of Radiology) Annual Meeting from 2010 to 2015

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A 2010 study on the global burden of disease found that the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders was 8.4%; this rate increased to 20–40% in people over the age of 80 years (Smith et al, 2014). The research abstracts submitted to this meeting undergo formal peerreview and while beneficial, evidence suggests that publication rates for conference abstracts are higher for those with positive findings, randomized designs, and larger sample sizes (Scherer, Langenberg & Von Elm, 2007) These studies have found that oral presentations and those falling into the category of experimental research are more frequently published (Easterbrook et al, 1991; Dickersin, Min & Meinert, 1992; Scherer, Langenberg & Von Elm, 2007). It is important to evaluate the rates of publication from conference presentations as a measure of academic quality as such research has undergone peer review and journal acceptance. At least half of the abstracts presented at the annual meeting for the Society of Skeletal Radiology are accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The rate at which presentations are published and the journals that accept the abstracts can potentially be used to compare the importance and quality of information at conferences

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call