Secondary publication in cardiovascular, endocrine and psychopharmacologic research

Orr, Richard H.; Crouse, Eleanor M.

doi:10.1002/asi.5090130208

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We analysed data from 64 studies published in 70 reports [1,3,19-86] (see Additional file 1). Four of those studies were published in two full reports each and with partial overlap of the data [1,45,46,50,51,62,74,84]. Another study was published in three abstracts with substantial redundancy of the reported data [79-81].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

More insight into the fate of biomedical meeting abstracts: a systematic review

Elm

Costanza

Walder

et al. 2003

BMC Med Res Methodol

171

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIt has been estimated that about 45% of abstracts that are accepted for presentation at biomedical meetings will subsequently be published in full. The acceptance of abstracts at meetings and their fate after initial rejection are less well understood. We set out to estimate the proportion of abstracts submitted to meetings that are eventually published as full reports, and to explore factors that are associated with meeting acceptance and successful publication.MethodsStudies analysing acceptance of abstracts at biomedical meetings or their subsequent full publication were searched in MEDLINE, OLDMEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, BIOSIS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and by hand searching of bibliographies and proceedings. We estimated rates of abstract acceptance and of subsequent full publication, and identified abstract and meeting characteristics associated with acceptance and publication, using logistic regression analysis, survival-type analysis, and meta-analysis.ResultsAnalysed meetings were held between 1957 and 1999. Of 14945 abstracts that were submitted to 43 meetings, 46% were accepted. The rate of full publication was studied with 19123 abstracts that were presented at 234 meetings. Using survival-type analysis, we estimated that 27% were published after two, 41% after four, and 44% after six years. Of 2412 abstracts that were rejected at 24 meetings, 27% were published despite rejection. Factors associated with both abstract acceptance and subsequent publication were basic science and positive study outcome. Large meetings and those held outside the US were more likely to accept abstracts. Abstracts were more likely to be published subsequently if presented either orally, at small meetings, or at a US meeting. Abstract acceptance itself was strongly associated with full publication.ConclusionsAbout one third of abstracts submitted to biomedical meetings were published as full reports. Acceptance at meetings and publication were associated with specific characteristics of abstracts and meetings.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

More insight into the fate of biomedical meeting abstracts: a systematic review

Elm

Costanza

Walder

et al. 2003

BMC Med Res Methodol

171

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They parallel the studies of literature dynamics discussed above. FLEMING and KILGOUR [19], BISHOP and OSBORN [1], BROWN [10], GREGORY [28], HUMMEL [31], KILGOUR [34][35][36][37], MORSE [48], RAISIG [57][58][59][60][61][62], ORR [52][53][54], and STANGL and KILGOUR [65,66] are examples of such studies of biomedical literature dynamics. No doubt these have influenced the concept of »core« collections of biomedical journals, such as those chosen to be initially included in .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomedical Literature Dynamics

Kraft¹,

Polacsek²

1974

Methods Inf Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper outlines the objective, background, rationale, specific aims, methods of procedure, and significance of a proposed research effort to develop a model of biomedical literature dynamics for study and use. Based on existing knowledge of the documentation process, the model would incorporate the factors of growth, obsolescence, and scattering of the biomedical journal literature, in terms of productivity and usage. The model could then be used, upon confrontation with data, to understand the variations in the dynamics of the bodies of literature in several biomedical disciplines. Several factors, such as discipline size and age, would be considered in the analysis of this variance. Finally, the model would be used as a basis for the consideration and comparison of several existing simple decision models, related to collection development and location in biomedical libraries.

show abstract

Cardiovascular serial literature: Characteristics, productive journals, and abstracting/indexing coverage

Frick¹,

Ginski²

1970

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two groups of journals were identified as potential sources for cardiovascular (c–v) information. The first group consists of 78 c–v specialty journals, identified as cardiovascular from the title. These 78 emanate from 24 countries, with about one‐half of the specialty journals being published by 28 national and international societies. The second group of journals is composed of those journals used by grantees of the National Heart Institute (NHI) to publish their findings. In fiscal 1967, 5,860 papers, appearing in 789 journals, were reported to NHI. Taking the grantees of NHI as being representative of U.S. c–v researchers, it was found that the specialty journals were not the most quantitatively fertile sources of c–v information–only about 14% of American c–v papers were published there. The remaining 86% of the literature was widely dispersed throughout 766 nonspecialty c–v journals. The extent of bibliographic control by the major indexing and abstracting services was found to be more extensive for the top‐ranking journals in the NHI sample than for the group of c–v specialty journals.

show abstract

Secondary publication in cardiovascular, endocrine and psychopharmacologic research

Cited by 7 publications

References 2 publications

More insight into the fate of biomedical meeting abstracts: a systematic review

More insight into the fate of biomedical meeting abstracts: a systematic review

Biomedical Literature Dynamics

Cardiovascular serial literature: Characteristics, productive journals, and abstracting/indexing coverage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About