Analysis of conference abstracts of prosthodontic randomised-controlled trials presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015): a cross-sectional study of the relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication

Abstract

ObjectivesTo analyse the relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication rate of conference abstracts of prosthodontic randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) presented at International Association for Dental Research (IADR) general sessions (2002–2015).DesignA cross-sectional study on conference abstracts.MethodsConference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015) were obtained. Literature search was performed in multiple databases to confirm the final publication status of conference abstracts. Two investigators independently extracted the data including conference date, origin, presentation type, exact p value, number of centres, institution type, overall conclusion, subspecialty, publication time and journal. The reporting quality of abstracts was assessed by two investigators according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. The relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication was analysed by χ2test.Setting, participants and interventionsNot applicable.Primary and secondary outcome measuresFinal publication rate, demographic characteristics and reporting quality of conference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015).ResultsOf the 340 prosthodontic RCT abstracts, 43.24% were published. The mean time to final publication was 22.86 months. Europe contributed the most number of abstracts but Asia and Australia had the highest publication rate. Oral presentation, multicentre trial and complete denture and overdenture subspecialty were associated with a higher publication rate. Reporting quality of eligibility criteria of participants, random assignment and primary outcome results for each group correlated with a higher final publication rate.ConclusionsOver half of conference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015) were unpublished. Oral presentation and multiple centres were associated with higher publication rates. Abstracts’ reporting quality addressing participant recruitment, assignment and primary results correlated with trials’ validity and applicability. Conference attendees may refer to this research to identify valid and applicable prosthodontic trials but should treat and apply results cautiously.

Reporting inconsistency between published conference abstracts and article abstracts of randomised controlled trials in prosthodontics presented at IADR general sessions

“…The ultimate criterion to evaluate the quality of a conference abstract is whether it is published in a peer-reviewed journal ( Prasad et al, 2012 ; Neves, Lavis & Ranson, 2012 ). However, not all conference abstracts are later published as full-text articles ( Stranges et al, 2015 ; Chen et al, 2020 ; Hinrichs, Ramirez & Ameen, 2021 ). In addition, Yoon & Knobloch (2012) found that compared to conference abstracts, article abstracts had at least one minor difference in title or authorship and 65% of article abstracts had major differences in study conclusions, statistical analysis, etc.…”

“…Full-text publications were identified as previously described in our another article ( Chen et al, 2020 ). The identification of publication began with a individual search of authors’ names.…”

“…Prosthodontics is an important branch of dental medicine. Our previous study discovered that the full-text published proportion of the abstracts of prosthodontics RCTs presented at the IADR general sessions was only 43.24% ( Chen et al, 2020 ), and the discrepancies and related risk factors between published conference abstracts and article abstracts of them have never been investigated.…”

Preprints as an alternative to conference proceedings: A hands‐on experience at EDICIC Iberian Meeting 2019

“…In both cases, the conversion of conference papers into journal articles is not automatic. Some studies have measured the degree of such conversion, especially in fields such as medicine where conferences are a preliminary phase in the communication of research results, finding rates of transformation around 40%, for example 43.24% (Chen et al, 2020), 43% (Javidan et al, 2019), or 37.3% (Scherer et al, 2018). Other studies measured the conversion of preprints into formal journal articles, and found higher conversion rates compared to conversion of conference papers to published articles: Lin et al (2020) working with data on arXiv cases found a rate of 77%, and Anderson (2020) found that approximately 70% of bioRxiv preprints become journal articles.…”

Uso de preprints en congresos científicos como alternativa a la publicación de actas: la experiencia del IX Encuentro Ibérico EDICIC 2019

“…En ambos casos, la conversión de las comunicaciones en artículos de revista no es automática y por ello podemos encontrar en la bibliografía ejemplos que analizan la tasa de conversión de las comunicaciones de congresos en artículos, especialmente numerosos en áreas como la medicina en las que el registro del conocimiento científico y la evaluación de la investigación se sustentan en las revistas y los congresos son un paso preliminar en la comunicación de resultados (p.e. Chen et al, 2020;Javidan et al, 2019;Scherer et al, 2018). Se trata de estudios de una naturaleza similar a los que analizan la conversión de preprints en artículos formalmente publicados (p.e.…”