Conversion of Plastic Surgery meeting abstract presentations to full manuscripts: a brazilian perspective

Denadai, Rafael; Pinho, André Silveira; Júnior, Hugo Samartine; Denadai, Rodrigo; Raposo-Amaral, Cássio Eduardo

doi:10.1590/0100-69912017001008

Cited by 9 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Given this information, researchers should be encouraged to present their abstracts at Brazilian events and, later, receive institutional support to publish them. The publication rate found for papers presented at the BBCS is in agreement with bibliometric studies conducted with other medical specialities in Brazil [1,8] but lower than that found for renowned international congresses [2,16,17]. The differences between this event and others held in Brazil for which publication rates are below 10% [9,18] may be due to the quality control applied by the respective scientific committees reviewing and selecting the papers submitted and to the methodological characteristics of the papers accepted for presentation at the congress [3,19].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…In a study that analysed the quality of the abstracts presented at the congress of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases, results showed that in around half the papers analysed the methodology was inadequately or incompletely described [11]. Among the published abstracts from the Brazilian Congress of Plastic Surgery, 88.5% had no statistical analysis, 76% had no impact factor and 52% had no citations [8]. In the present study, 55 (49.1%) abstracts were published in journals with no impact factor and another 16 (14.3%) with an impact factor between 0.1 and 2.0.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Data published in Brazil show that most of the scientific papers presented at medical congresses do not go on to be published in indexed journals [8,9]. At the Brazilian Congresses of Angiology and Vascular Surgery held between 2001 and 2003, the mean publication rate was 6.3% [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Publication rate of scientific papers presented at the largest event on breast cancer research in Latin America

Nascimento¹,

Rahal²,

Soares³

et al. 2021

ecancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Medical congresses allow scientific production to be appropriately disseminated and discussed. However, most of the scientific papers presented at medical congresses do not go on to be published in indexed journals. The present study aimed to determine the publication rate of papers presented at the Brazilian Breast Cancer Symposium (BBCS) and trends associated with publication over that timeframe.Methods: This was a retrospective, observational study evaluating scientific papers presented at the BBCS between 2012 and 2017. All the abstracts presented at the event within this timeframe were recorded. Next, a search for papers was made using online databases (BIREME/LILACS and MEDLINE/PubMed) and in the curricula of the authors on the Lattes Platform.Results: Overall, 543 abstracts of papers presented at the BBCS between 2012 and 2017 were included. Of these, 112 (20.6%) had been published in an indexed journal, mostly in English (67.0%), in journals with an impact factor of 2.0-3.0 (21.4%) and ≥1 year after presentation at the event (75.9%). The factors associated with publication were: study conducted in a public institution (p = 0.01), oral or commented poster presentation (p > 0.001) and study concerning rehabilitation following breast cancer (p = 0.04). There was a downward trend in the rate of publication of articles over the years (p = 0.01). Conversely, the impact factor of the publications increased significantly between 2012 and 2017 (p = 0.04). Conclusion:The publication rate of papers presented at the BBCS is low and remains consistent over the study period despite academic incentives and substantial awards.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Publication rate of scientific papers presented at the largest event on breast cancer research in Latin America

Nascimento¹,

Rahal²,

Soares³

et al. 2021

ecancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…16,17 The mean time to publication from the date of oral presentation was 13.83 months, which is consistent with other studies following abstracts presented at plastic surgery conferences (ranging from 13 to 25 months) as well as conferences of other specialties, such as podiatry (mean time of 16.3 months), hand surgery (mean time of 18 months), and otolaryngology (16 months). 4,7,8,[12][13][14][15] Abstracts presented in 2018 had significantly lower publication times than those presented in 2014 to 2016, which is most likely due to the shorter window of time between oral presentation and the last date of this study's literature review for the 2018 ASRM meeting. This may also be due to the streamlined process of online article submission, review, and decision dissemination.…”

Section: Conversion Of Abstract To Full Manuscript Publication In a Pmentioning

confidence: 78%

Abstract to Publication in Microsurgery: What Are the Discrepancies?

Maisner

Ayyala

Agag

2020

J Reconstr Microsurg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The American Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery (ASRM) annual meeting is a forum to present new research abstracts prior to peer-reviewed publication. The aim of this study is to determine the conversion rate, discrepancies, and time between presentation and publication. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted cross-referencing ASRM abstracts presented between 2014 and 2018 with peer-reviewed manuscripts. The title and authors of the abstract and manuscript, the journal of manuscript publication, and time in months between presentation and publication were recorded. The conversion rate was calculated as the proportion of publications to abstracts. Major discrepancies were defined as changes in the purpose, study design, methods, sample size, statistical analysis, results, or conclusions. Minor discrepancies were defined as changes in the title or authorship. Results Out of 667 oral abstract presentations, 361 (54%) resulted in publication. Of these abstracts, 53 were presented after their corresponding manuscripts were published. The mean conversion rate was 55.52 ± 10.17%. The mean time from presentation to publication was 13.83 months. Minor discrepancies were more frequent than major discrepancies (91 vs. 76%). The most common major and minor discrepancies involved changes in the results (63%) and authorship (79%), respectively. There was a significant association between the year of abstract presentation and whether the conclusion was changed (p = 0.001), but interyear relationships with all other discrepancies failed to reach statistical significance. Conclusion Only around half of abstracts presented at the annual ASRM conference have reached full publication in peer-reviewed journals, and most are undergoing significant changes between presentation and publication. This may be due to panel discussions at meetings suggesting study modifications, as well as revisions after careful peer review. Altering surgical practices may not be recommended based on abstracts' content.

show abstract

“…Previous studies have shown higher publication rates for abstracts including statistical analysis, 5 , 16 intuitively adding validity and power to a study's methodology and data analysis. We stratified abstracts based on incorporation of advanced statistical analysis, defined as anything beyond basic descriptive statistics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of abstract features presented at the combined otolaryngology spring meeting predicting publication in impactful peer‐reviewed journals

Dwyer

Rosow

Stockton³

et al. 2021

Laryngoscope Investig Oto

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Review abstracts presented at the Combined Otolaryngology Society Meeting (COSM) to determine subsequent publication and identify abstract features predictive of publication in high impact journals. Methods A selection of abstracts accepted in the 2015 COSM scientific programs were retrospectively reviewed. MEDLINE searches via PubMed and Google Scholar were performed to determine publication rates. The Journal of Citation Reports was used to determine impact factors for published abstracts. Binomial regression analyses were used to identify factors related to publication in high impact journals. Results 62.4% of reviewed abstracts (n = 623) were subsequently published, with a mean publication time of 14 ± 12 months. Abstract features predictive of publication were basic science type, other science type, prospective studies, multi‐institutional involvement, and presentation at the American Laryngologic Association and American Otologic Society meetings. Based on Wald score, podium presentation was found to have the biggest effect on publication. Factors positively associated with publication in high impact (impact factor > 2.272) journals were increased author number and sample size. Conclusions Overall publication rate of abstracts selected for presentation at COSM in 2015 was on the higher end of previously reported otolaryngology meetings. Abstracts detailing basic science, other science, prospective and multi‐institutional studies were more likely to lead to future publication. Additionally, increased number of authors and sample size lead to publication in higher impact journals. Level of Evidence N/A.

show abstract

Conversion of Plastic Surgery meeting abstract presentations to full manuscripts: a brazilian perspective

Cited by 9 publications

References 27 publications

Publication rate of scientific papers presented at the largest event on breast cancer research in Latin America

Publication rate of scientific papers presented at the largest event on breast cancer research in Latin America

Abstract to Publication in Microsurgery: What Are the Discrepancies?

Identification of abstract features presented at the combined otolaryngology spring meeting predicting publication in impactful peer‐reviewed journals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About