2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Seventy Percent of Abstracts Presented at the AANA Annual Meeting Are Later Published

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          To assess the future publication rates of abstracts presented at AANA annual meetings between 2015 and 2019.

          Methods

          Abstracts presented at the 2015-2019 AANA annual meetings were identified. The PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched for a corresponding manuscript for each abstract using the name of the first author, abstract title, and keywords. A level of evidence and anatomic category were assigned to each abstract. For each corresponding manuscript identified, the authors, journal of publication, journal impact factor (IF), time to publication, and number of citations were recorded.

          Results

          Overall, 70.5% of abstracts presented at the 2015-2019 AANA annual meetings (275 of 390) went on to future publication, with 63.6% (248 of 390) achieving publication within 3 years. The median time to publication from presentation was 12.8 months. Arthroscopy (29.8%) was the most frequent journal of publication. The average IF of publishing journals was 4.92 ± 3.41, with 61.8% of manuscripts (170 of 275) published in journals with an IF of at least 4.00. Published manuscripts received an average of 36.30 ± 47.6 citations per manuscript. A stronger level of evidence was associated with an increased likelihood of future publication ( P = .008).

          Conclusions

          Pre-publication literature presented at the AANA annual meetings has continued to be associated with a strong likelihood of future publication in Arthroscopy and Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation, as well as other respected peer-reviewed journals.

          Clinical Relevance

          Exposure to pre-publication literature may have an impact on clinical management. It is important to understand the quality of research presented in abstracts from AANA annual meetings. Knowing how many abstracts are ultimately published in peer-reviewed journals provides an indicator of the quality and reliability of the research.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality?

          Impact factor, an index based on the frequency with which a journal's articles are cited in scientific publications, is a putative marker of journal quality. However, empiric studies on impact factor's validity as an indicator of quality are lacking. The authors assessed the validity of impact factor as a measure of quality for general medical journals by testing its association with journal quality as rated by clinical practitioners and researchers. We surveyed physicians specializing in internal medicine in the United States, randomly sampled from the American Medical Association's Physician Masterfile (practitioner group, n = 113) and from a list of graduates from a national postdoctoral training program in clinical and health services research (research group, n = 151). Respondents rated the quality of nine general medical journals, and we assessed the correlation between these ratings and the journals' impact factors. The correlation between impact factor and physicians' ratings of journal quality was strong (r2 = 0.82, P = 0.001). The correlation was higher for the research group (r2 = 0.83, P = 0.001) than for the practitioner group (r2 = 0.62, P = 0.01). Impact factor may be a reasonable indicator of quality for general medical journals.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Publication rates of presentations at an annual meeting of the american academy of orthopaedic surgeons.

            The Program Committee of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgery (AAOS) continually tries to improve the quality of the scientific program at AAOS meetings. However, according to the most recent study, the publication rate of papers presented at the 1996 annual meeting was only 34%. To quantify the effects of these measures, we determined the 5-year publication rates in peer-reviewed journals of papers presented at the 2001 AAOS annual meeting. Using the same methods described by Bhandari et al., we performed a comprehensive search of Medline and PubMed for subsequent publications of podium and poster presentations. The publication rates for all presentations were 49% at 5 years with poster and podium presentations at 47% and 52%, respectively. Among subspecialty divisions, the highest rate of publication was the sports medicine and arthroscopy category with 58% and the lowest was in the rehabilitative medicine category with 21%. Less than 50% of abstracts presented at the 2001 AAOS annual meeting were published in the peer-reviewed literature at 5 years. As many studies presented will not pass the scrutiny of peer review, the information presented at the AAOS annual meeting should not be used as the sole guide to clinic practice.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Abstracts presented at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting: determinants of subsequent peer reviewed publication.

              Abstracts submitted to medical meetings do not undergo the same critical peer review process as published manuscripts. Despite this limited scrutiny presented abstracts often influence clinical thinking and practice. Consequently the peer reviewed publication rate of abstracts becomes critical in judging the quality of this research. We determined this publication rate and factors influencing it. All 1,584 abstracts presented at the 2000 American Urological Association Annual Meeting were reviewed and assessed for subsequent publication with a fixed MEDLINE search protocol. We searched for publications from January 1, 1999 to May 31, 2005. Abstracts were deemed published if 1) at least 1 author of the presented abstract was a manuscript author and 2) at least 1 conclusion in the presented abstract was included in the final publication conclusions. Publication rates according to mode and topic of presentation, country or state of origin and time to publication were calculated. Journal impact factors for publications were compared according to these variables. Of presented abstracts from the 2000 American Urological Association meeting 55% went on to successful publication, including 59% of podium, 55% of poster, 55% of unmoderated poster and 42% of video presentations. Mean time from presentation to publication was 17 months. The average journal impact factor was 3.2. A significant proportion of presentations at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting is never subjected to or fails the critical peer review process. The overall journal impact factor for published manuscripts is modest. Meeting attendees should consider these observations when deciding whether to incorporate the findings of presentations into their clinical practice.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil
                Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil
                Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation
                Elsevier
                2666-061X
                08 December 2023
                February 2024
                08 December 2023
                : 6
                : 1
                : 100838
                Affiliations
                [a ]Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
                [b ]Northwell Orthopedics, New Hyde Park, New York, U.S.A.
                Author notes
                []Address correspondence to Brandon Klein, D.O., M.B.A., 270 Park Ave, Huntington, NY 11743, U.S.A. bklein2417@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                S2666-061X(23)00189-X 100838
                10.1016/j.asmr.2023.100838
                10755268
                8d005556-b400-4499-ba51-6f55f0b08791
                © 2023 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 8 August 2023
                : 3 November 2023
                Categories
                Original Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content26

                Most referenced authors167