The metabolism of new scientific information: A preliminary report

Abstract

TO INVESTIGATE the metabolism of new scientific information, questionnaires were sent to the authors of 463 papers presented or "read by title" at two important meetings for cardiovascular and endocrine research workers. The preliminary findings indicate that, of the approximately 60% of authors responding, about one-third submitted their papers for publication before, or within 6 months after, the meeting. The interval between submission and publication was around 6 months. Less than 60% of the papers on which the follow-up is complete were published within 2 years. The study is continuing and a sample of the authors will be interviewed before a detailed and comprehensive analysis of the data can be made. However, the major tentative conclusions are: 1. The factors determining whether and how soon an oral report is published after a meeting are related more to the personal characteristics and working conditions of the author than to the quality of work or to selection and publication delay by journals.2. The similarity of findings in this study of biological research reports with available data on similar reports in the physical sciences indicates important common features in the metabolism of all new scientific information. 3. The technique of using oral research reports as tracers to study the flow of scientific information is practical and useful. NFORMATION is one of the vital nutrients of research.

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

“…We excluded 14: three were not about biomedical meetings [5-7], six were on collections of abstracts across meetings that were not identifiable individually [8-13]; and in five, relevant data could not be extracted [14-18]. 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].…”

“…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].…”

“…Over 40 years ago, the filtering process from the stage of designing a study until publication of the results was likened to a biological metabolism [1]. Abstracts that are presented at biomedical meetings often provide the first evidence of a research activity.…”

“…Since abstracts are usually published in proceeding volumes or in journal supplements, they can be followed up until successful publication as full reports. Thus, through follow-up of abstracts from meeting submission to subsequent full publication, some aspects of this "metabolism" [1] can be studied. Systematic review of reports that focused on the follow-up of meeting abstracts identified some specific characteristics of the abstracts that were associated with successful publication [2,3].…”

Differences in STEM doctoral publication by ethnicity, gender and academic field at a large public research university

“…The first asked students, “Did you deliver any papers at national scholarly meetings?” Presenting at national meetings is an important precursor to publication and signals active engagement in the research enterprise [15]. A second question in this survey asked, "Were you encouraged by faculty in your department to publish?"…”