Factors affecting publication in peer‐reviewed journals of abstracts presented from 2008 to 2012 <scp>ACVO</scp> meetings

Bentley, Ellison; Koester, Megan; Bdolah‐Abram, Tali; Yair, Nadav; Ofri, Ron

doi:10.1111/vop.12573

Cited by 9 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(25 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Publication rates from scientific conferences are more readily available in human medicine but are unfortunately lacking in veterinary medicine, with only six other reports. [1][2][3][4][5][6]8,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] This study is the first of its kind to document the publication rate of veterinary orthopaedic abstracts and only the second to evaluate the LoE of veterinary abstracts. 5 The overall publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual VOS Conference is comparable to other veterinary specialty meetings but lower than those from another prominent veterinary surgery conference.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4,6 However, VOS abstracts had a higher publication rate than the 29 and 32% publication rates for abstracts presented during a 5-year period at European and American veterinary ophthalmology conferences, respectively. 2,3 The LoE was low for the majority of abstracts presented at the VOS conference between 2001 and 2014. During that time, 80% of abstracts were determined to have level 4 or 5 evidence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…podium versus poster), study design, species, author nationality, resident authorship, affiliation with a university and presence of funding have been shown to significantly affect the likelihood of publication. 2,3,6 Information necessary for evaluating some of these factors, such as presentation type, was not uniformly available for all VOS abstracts during the time period assessed. Reasons for lack of publication were not addressed in this report.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 However, peer-reviewed publications are considered a more reliable method of sharing current research and techniques, because abstracts commonly lack enough detail to be critically evaluated, often undergo minimal peer-review and may not be available to a wide audience. [1][2][3] Therefore, timely submission to and publication in a peer-reviewed journal is paramount, and our understanding of this process and timeline is critical to ensure prompt delivery of research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, a series of recent reports have shown that on average only 56% (range: 29-74%) of abstracts presented at veterinary specialty conferences make it to final publication. [1][2][3][4][5][6] Additionally, studies with a higher level of evidence (LoE) are submitted, accepted and published more rapidly than ones with a lower LoE. 5 To date, there has been no evaluation of the publication rate of abstracts presented at the annual Veterinary Orthopedic Society (VOS) Conference.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Publication Rate and Evidence-Based Evaluation of Abstracts Presented at the Annual Veterinary Orthopedic Society Conference

Kettleman

Iuliani

Webb

et al. 2020

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Scientific abstracts are a common method for disseminating new research. There is no information on the publication rate of orthopaedic surgery abstracts presented at the annual Veterinary Orthopedic Society (VOS) Conference. The objectives of this study were to document the publication rate, the publication timeline and the level of evidence (LoE) of abstracts presented at an annual orthopaedic meeting. Study Design All conference abstracts from the 2001 to 2014 annual VOS meeting were reviewed, and final publication was determined through a comprehensive bibliographic search. Results Over 14 conferences, 1,112 scientific abstracts were presented with an overall publication rate of 47%. The majority of abstracts had low LoE scores, and those abstracts were published less timely than ones with higher LoE scores. Once presented, most abstracts took 1 year to be submitted and 2 years to be published. Dog (45%) and ex vivo (19%) studies were the most common. Publication occurred most frequently in Veterinary Surgery (40%), Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology (17%) and the American Journal of Veterinary Research (12%). Conclusion The publication rate for abstracts presented at the annual VOS meeting is lower than those from a more generalized veterinary surgery conference. Publication occurs most frequently in a select group of journals, and the subject matter is limited in scope with a focus on dog and ex vivo studies. Overall, most abstracts presented at VOS contain a lower LoE.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Publication Rate and Evidence-Based Evaluation of Abstracts Presented at the Annual Veterinary Orthopedic Society Conference

Kettleman

Iuliani

Webb

et al. 2020

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Frequency of Abstracts Presented at Eye and Vision Conferences Being Developed Into Full-Length Publications

Jian‐Yu

Ramulu²,

Fapohunda

et al. 2020

JAMA Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCEConference proceedings are platforms for early communication and dissemination of relevant and timely topics of interest. More than half of abstracts presented at biomedical conferences fail to be published in full, resulting in wasted time and resources.OBJECTIVE To systematically review reports evaluating the proportion of abstracts presented at eye and vision conferences that are subsequently published in full and investigate factors associated with publication.DATA SOURCES MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and reference lists of included reports were systematically searched from inception to January 11, 2019.STUDY SELECTION Reports that examined the proportion of abstracts presented at eye and vision conferences and subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals 24 or more months later.DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility, abstracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias. A meta-analysis was conducted to determine the proportion of abstracts published in full and assess factors associated with subsequent full publication. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Proportion of abstracts presented at eye and vision conferences subsequently published in full.RESULTS There were 19 reports covering 12 261 abstracts presented at 11 unique eye and vision conferences. The overall risk of bias of the reports was low. The weighted proportion of abstracts published in full was 38.0% (95% CI, 31.7%-44.3%) and 54.9% (95% CI, 34.6%-73.7%) among reports restricted to abstracts describing randomized clinical trials. Nine reports (47.4%) investigated the proportion of abstracts subsequently published by ophthalmic subspecialties, ranging from 28.3% (oculoplastics: 95% CI, 17.2%-42.9%) to 42.7% (glaucoma: 95% CI, 34.7%-51.0%). Oral presentation (risk ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.20-1.76) and basic science (risk ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.05-1.47) were significantly associated with higher full publication; factors not significantly associated with full publication included positive results, randomized clinical trial vs other study design, multicenter study, and industry funding.CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE More than 60% of abstracts presented at eye and vision conferences were not published in full within 2 years of conference presentation. Failure to disseminate research studies in peer-reviewed journals is not desired, especially when involving human participants.

show abstract

The multifaceted factors affecting the publication times of pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus articles: what has changed in two decades

Baharav Shlezinger,

Mosleh,

Ben-David

et al. 2024

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Expeditious publication is an important factor when considering publishing ophthalmic research. We investigated the factors associated with shorter publication times in pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus (POS). We analyzed 2487 POS articles from 8 ophthalmology journals publishing POS articles. Time from submission to acceptance, from acceptance to publication, and from submission to publication were calculated for each article. We compared trends over time of factors affecting the publication times from 2002 to 2007 and those from 2014 to 2018. Median peer review durations were 156 days from submission to acceptance; 79 days from acceptance to publication, and 244 days from submission to publication. The American Journal of Ophthalmology, JAMA Ophthalmology, and Strabismus had the shortest submission to publication time. Authors from Africa, East Europe, Central and South America received the fastest processing time in all time categories, although most authors were based in North America and UK. All-time intervals decreased annually, significantly more during the first decade. In the study's second period, more co-authors and affiliated departments correlated with shorter review times. Manuscripts in higher Impact Factor (IF) journals had faster publication times in the first decade. Female senior authors faced longer submission-to-acceptance times in the first decade. This gender gap disappeared in the second period. A general improvement occurred with most journals, specifically those journals with a higher number of co-authors and affiliated departments, indicating an efficient collaborative authorship. Low-income regions benefited from comparatively shorter time intervals. The gender gap in senior authorship diminished over time.

show abstract

Factors affecting publication in peer‐reviewed journals of abstracts presented from 2008 to 2012 ACVO meetings

Abstract: At 32%, ACVO PR for the study years is similar to ECVO PR of 29%.

Cited by 9 publications

References 16 publications

Publication Rate and Evidence-Based Evaluation of Abstracts Presented at the Annual Veterinary Orthopedic Society Conference

Publication Rate and Evidence-Based Evaluation of Abstracts Presented at the Annual Veterinary Orthopedic Society Conference

Frequency of Abstracts Presented at Eye and Vision Conferences Being Developed Into Full-Length Publications

The multifaceted factors affecting the publication times of pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus articles: what has changed in two decades

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About