Abstract
Background: Reports have suggested that academic medicine may be in decline within the UK. Further evidence suggests that rates of subsequent full publication of abstracts presented at major scientific meetings are low and may be declining. We have compared the publication rates of abstracts presented at meetings of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) between 1995 and 2005 and examined factors associated with full paper publication. Methods: s presented at BSG meetings in 1995 and 2005 were assessed by cross-referencing with multiple databases. characteristics associated with publication were analysed. Results: There were no differences in overall publication rates, impact factors or time to publication between 1995 and 2005. Overall, basic-science abstracts were twice as likely to achieve full publication than non-basic science. There was a significant fall in the publication rates for case series and audits, and significantly increased rates for fundamental/basic-science abstracts over the study period. There were non-significant increases in publication rates for controlled trials and systematic reviews. In general, publication rates for all predominantly clinically orientated abstracts reduced between the two periods with the most notable fall occurring in nutrition. Conclusions: There was no evidence of a decline in overall abstract publication rates between 1995 and 2005. There seemed to be trend for increased publication rates of abstracts using perceived high-quality study methodologies with a corresponding decrease in those with lower quality methods. The proportion of basic-science abstracts is likely to be a determinant of overall full publication rates following scientific meetings.
Highlights
Reports have suggested that academic medicine may be in decline within the UK
In this study we have examined the publication rates from two British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) meetings separted by 10 years to determine if publication rates have changed and to examine whether there was any relationship between study type, subspeciality within gastroenterology and time-lag to publication
We examined whether study type or overall topic seemed to be associated with publication rates
Summary
Further evidence suggests that rates of subsequent full publication of abstracts presented at major scientific meetings are low and may be declining. The proportion of basic-science abstracts is likely to be a determinant of overall full publication rates following scientific meetings. Abstracts are presented at national and international conferences to rapidly communicate the results of new and original research. This process allows the researcher to receive preliminary and informal peer review from fellow researchers in the field. It has been suggested that abstracts submitted to conferences are peer-reviewed; this process may not be as rigorous as that of an indexed journal considering full publication[1]. A Cochrane review examined abstract publication rates of all medical subspecialties and reported a mean full (peer-reviewed journal) publication rate of 44.5%, with higher rates of 63.1% for randomised or controlled clinical trials[5]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
