Factors to improve academic publishing success of physicians engaged in scientific research

Abstract

IntroductionScientific evidence in medicine is based on data generated from research. Recently, the number of scientifically active physicians has decreased, which has led to the development of the Clinician Scientist Programs. To better structure and focus the research of young physicians, we aimed to investigate the impact of collaborations and other factors on the quality and output of scientific publications. MethodsThe abstracts of three annual congresses of the German Society of Urology were systematically analysed regarding content, collaborations, and study design. Full-text publications and journals were identified through a MEDLINE® search. Impact factors (IFs) were identified using Journal Citation Reports™. To identify factors which predict publication and IFs, χ2 and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the best model for publication success for an abstract as well as the achievement of a high IF. Results1,074 abstracts were reviewed. The publication rate of subsequent peer-reviewed full-text publications was 52.5%. Collaborations with at least one institution (odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48–2.76, p <0.0001), statistical analysis (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.41–2.60, p <0.0001), study design (prospective vs. retrospective: OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.06–1.93, p=0.021), and national collaborations (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.04–1.98, p=0.029) increased the likelihood of publication in a peer-reviewed journal in a multivariable logistic regression analysis. Experimental design (OR 2.77, 95% CI 1.32–5.84, p=0.007), international collaborations (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.23-4.15, p=0.009), oncologic topics (OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.23–3.07, p=0.005), prostate disease (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.08–2.84, p=0.023), and statistical analysis (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.06–2.64, p=0.026) were associated with a higher IF. ConclusionAbstracts resulting from collaborative research projects had a higher likelihood of subsequent full-text publication and a higher IF. More full-text publications were reported when abstracts included a statistical analysis. Hence, intensive networking (e. g. at congresses and workshops) of researching physicians as well as statistical/biometrical classes could be key factors to improve academic success.