Suppr超能文献

1993年在全国性会议上发表的神经放射学摘要的命运:随后在同行评审的索引期刊上发表的比例。

The fate of neuroradiologic abstracts presented at national meetings in 1993: rate of subsequent publication in peer-reviewed, indexed journals.

作者信息

Marx W F, Cloft H J, Do H M, Kallmes D F

机构信息

Department of Radiology, University of Virginia Health Sciences Center, Charlottesville 22901, USA.

出版信息

AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1999 Jun-Jul;20(6):1173-7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Abstract presentations are a valuable means of rapidly conveying new information; however, abstracts that fail to eventually become published are of little use to the general medical community. Our goals were to determine the publication rate of neuroradiologic papers originally presented at national meetings in 1993 and to assess publication rate as a function of neuroradiologic subspecialty and study design.

METHODS

Proceedings from the 1993 ASNR and RSNA meetings were reviewed. A MEDLINE search encompassing 1993-1997 was performed cross-referencing lead author and at least one text word based on the abstract title. All ASNR and RSNA neuroradiologic abstracts were included. Study type, subspecialty classification, and sample size were tabulated. Publication rate, based on study design and neuroradiologic subspecialty, was compared with overall publication rate. Median duration from meeting presentation to publication was calculated, and the journals of publication were noted.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven percent of ASNR abstracts and 33% of RSNA neuroradiologic abstracts were published as articles in indexed medical journals. Publication rates among neuroradiologic subspecialty types were not significantly different. Prospective studies presented at the ASNR were published at a higher rate than were retrospective studies. There was no difference between the publication rate of experimental versus clinical studies. Neuroradiologic abstracts were published less frequently than were abstracts within other medical specialties. Median time between abstract presentation and publication was 15 months.

CONCLUSION

Approximately one third of neuroradiologic abstracts presented at national meetings in 1993 were published in indexed journals. This rate is lower than that of abstracts from medical specialties other than radiology.

摘要

背景与目的

摘要展示是迅速传达新信息的一种重要手段;然而,那些最终未能发表的摘要对广大医学群体几乎没有用处。我们的目标是确定1993年在全国性会议上首次展示的神经放射学论文的发表率,并评估发表率与神经放射学亚专业及研究设计之间的关系。

方法

回顾了1993年美国神经放射学会(ASNR)和北美放射学会(RSNA)会议的论文集。基于摘要标题,对1993 - 1997年进行了MEDLINE检索,交叉引用第一作者和至少一个文本关键词。纳入了所有ASNR和RSNA的神经放射学摘要。将研究类型、亚专业分类和样本量制成表格。根据研究设计和神经放射学亚专业比较发表率与总体发表率。计算从会议展示到发表的中位时长,并记录发表期刊。

结果

37%的ASNR摘要和33%的RSNA神经放射学摘要在索引医学期刊上发表为文章。神经放射学亚专业类型之间的发表率无显著差异。在ASNR会议上展示的前瞻性研究发表率高于回顾性研究。实验性研究与临床研究的发表率无差异。神经放射学摘要的发表频率低于其他医学专业的摘要。摘要展示与发表之间的中位时间为15个月。

结论

1993年在全国性会议上展示的神经放射学摘要中,约三分之一在索引期刊上发表。这一比率低于放射学以外医学专业的摘要发表率。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

2
Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts.初步以摘要形式呈现的结果的完整发表。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Nov 20;11(11):MR000005. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000005.pub4.

本文引用的文献

5
Publication of abstracts presented at anaesthesia meetings.麻醉会议上发表的摘要
Can J Anaesth. 1993 Jul;40(7):632-4. doi: 10.1007/BF03009700.
6
NIH clinical trials and publication bias.美国国立卫生研究院的临床试验与发表偏倚。
Online J Curr Clin Trials. 1993 Apr 28;Doc No 50:[4967 words; 53 paragraphs].
7
Publication bias: the problem that won't go away.发表偏倚:一个挥之不去的问题。
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993 Dec 31;703:135-46; discussion 146-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb26343.x.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验