Publication Rates of Posters From the Orthopaedic Trauma Association Annual Meeting 2011–2016: Posters Are Not Second Rate

Melvin, Patricia R; Cannada, Lisa K.

doi:10.1097/bot.0000000000001667

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies of academic conferences in other surgical subspecialties revealed publication rates of 31.1% at the British Association of Head and Neck Oncologists annual meeting, 69.9% at the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons annual meeting and 54% at the Orthopaedic Trauma Association annual meeting. 16–18 The studies from other national subspecialty organizations are in line with our findings for the AUA Annual Meeting. Additionally, the publication rate for RCTs in our study was 65.6%, which is comparable to past analysis of RCT publication.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…Our finding that many abstracts were published in advance of presentation is a common finding among academic conferences, and this trend has been observed in the past at the AUA Annual Meeting. 6,16,18 The time to publication, while similar to past AUA Annual Meeting studies, is much shorter than recent studies in other surgical subspecialties: 19.4 months at the Orthopaedic Trauma Association annual meeting and 18.8 months at the British Association of Head and Neck Oncologists annual meeting. 6,16,18 This may suggest that AUA Annual Meeting abstracts that achieve publication may be closer to a final product than at other academic conferences.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

“…6,16,18 The time to publication, while similar to past AUA Annual Meeting studies, is much shorter than recent studies in other surgical subspecialties: 19.4 months at the Orthopaedic Trauma Association annual meeting and 18.8 months at the British Association of Head and Neck Oncologists annual meeting. 6,16,18 This may suggest that AUA Annual Meeting abstracts that achieve publication may be closer to a final product than at other academic conferences. It is notable that we found no relation between presentation type and publication rates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Trends in Publication of Oncologic Abstracts Presented at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting: 1997–2017

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

:Introduction:Our primary aim was to characterize eventual publication of presented American Urological Association (AUA) Annual Meeting oncology abstracts from 1997 to 2017. We hypothesized that the percentage of abstracts presented at the AUA Annual Meeting that became published peer-reviewed manuscripts increased over time.Methods:AUA Annual Meeting abstracts in “oncology” categories from 1997 to 2017 were identified. A random sample of 100 abstracts per year were assessed for publication. An abstract was considered “published” if 1) first and last author of the abstract were included on publication, 2) abstract and publication shared 1 conclusion, and 3) publication occurred from 1 year prior to the AUA Annual Meeting up to 10 years after. The search was conducted on PubMed® utilizing the MEDLINE® database.Results:Over the 20-year observation period, 2,100 abstracts were reviewed and 56.3% were published. The number of journals in which manuscripts were published increased from 1997 to 2017 (R2=0.58, p <0.001), although here wasn’t an increased publication rate for AUA Annual Meeting abstracts. Median time to publication was 1.1 years (IQR: 0.6–2.2). Median impact factor (IF) of publications was 3.3 (IQR 2.4–4.7). There was a decrease in median IF with longer interval to publication, from 3.6 within 1 year to 2.8 at more than 3 years (p=0.0003). Publications from multi-institutional abstracts had a higher mean IF (3.7 vs 3.1, p <0.0001).Conclusions:The majority of oncology abstracts presented at the AUA Annual Meeting are published. Despite growth in the number of journals and rise in IF among top urology journals, the rate of publication and IF were stable over time.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trends in Publication of Oncologic Abstracts Presented at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting: 1997–2017

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…is trend towards higher publication rates in recent years is reflected throughout orthopedics. Publication rates for national orthopedic meetings ranged from 34% to 67% in the 1990s, compared to 54% to 74% in recent reports, which is similar to our results [1][2][3][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. e OTA meeting is one wellstudied example, with relatively high publication rates overall that increased from 67% (1994 to 1998) to 73% (2008 to 2012) for podium presentations [2,3].…”

Section: Sarcomasupporting

confidence: 88%

Comparison of Publication Rates for Musculoskeletal Oncology Abstracts Presented at National Meetings

Collier

Quereshy

Getty

2021

Sarcoma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Scientific meetings provide a forum to disseminate new research and advance patient care. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), Connective Tissue Oncology Society (CTOS), and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) annual meetings are examples of such gatherings in the field of musculoskeletal oncology. After a review of select MSTS abstracts from 1991 to 1999 revealed a 41% publication rate in scientific journals, previous authors cautioned meeting attendees that the majority of abstracts may not survive rigorous peer review and may not be scientifically valid. Since two decades have passed, this study reexamined publication rates and characteristics in a contemporary and expanded cohort of oncology abstracts presented at the AAOS, CTOS, and MSTS annual meetings. Methods. 1408 podium and poster abstracts from the AAOS (oncology-focused from 2013 to 2015), CTOS (2012 to 2014), and MSTS (2012 to 2014) annual meetings were reviewed to allow for a four-year publication window. Searches were performed with PubMed and Google Scholar databases to identify full-text publications using abstract keywords. Characteristics of each abstract and resulting publication were collected. Statistical analysis was performed using the chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests for time-independent comparisons, and the log-rank test after reverse Kaplan-Meier analysis for time-dependent comparisons. Results. Abstract publication rates overall were higher for podium presentations (67%, 280 of 415) compared to poster presentations (53%, 530 of 993; p < 0.001 ). When both abstract types were combined, differences between meetings did not meet statistical significance (AAOS: 65%, 106 of 162; CTOS: 57%, 521 of 909; MSTS: 54%, 183 of 337, p = 0.06 ). Abstracts from AAOS meetings were more often published prior to the first day of the meeting (AAOS: 24%, 25 of 106; CTOS: 10%, 52 of 521; MSTS: 14%, 25 of 183; p < 0.01 ). After excluding previously published abstracts, AAOS abstracts had the shortest time to publication (median: 10.8 months, interquartile range (IQR): 4.4 to 18.8 months), compared to those from CTOS (16.0 months, 8.4 to 25.9 months, p < 0.01 ) and MSTS (15 months, 7.9 to 25.0 months, p < 0.01 ) meetings. CTOS abstracts were published in higher impact journals (median: 3.7, IQR: 2.9 to 5.9), compared to those from AAOS (2.9, 1.9 to 3.2, p < 0.01 ) and MSTS (3.1, 2.3 to 3.1, p < 0.01 ) meetings. Finally, 7.7% (62 of 810) of published abstracts were presented at more than one meeting. Conclusions. Publication rates in this study were higher than previous reports in musculoskeletal oncology and comparable or better than recent reports for other orthopedic meetings. Comparisons across the AAOS, CTOS, and MSTS annual meetings highlight notable differences but suggest similarity overall in the quality of evidence presented with little overlap between meetings. Taken together, this study points to progress in the review processes used by the program committees, reaffirms the importance of critical appraisal when considering abstract findings, and supports the continued organization of multiple scientific meetings in musculoskeletal oncology.

show abstract

Publication Rates of Poster and Podium Presentations at the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Annual Meetings 2016 to 2019

Grace,

Imam,

Posner

et al. 2024

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Publication Rates of Posters From the Orthopaedic Trauma Association Annual Meeting 2011–2016: Posters Are Not Second Rate

Cited by 6 publications

References 16 publications

Trends in Publication of Oncologic Abstracts Presented at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting: 1997–2017

Trends in Publication of Oncologic Abstracts Presented at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting: 1997–2017

Comparison of Publication Rates for Musculoskeletal Oncology Abstracts Presented at National Meetings

Publication Rates of Poster and Podium Presentations at the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Annual Meetings 2016 to 2019

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About