Suppr超能文献

在儿科学术协会年会上的展示形式能否预测后续的发表情况?

Does presentation format at the Pediatric Academic Societies' annual meeting predict subsequent publication?

作者信息

Carroll Aaron E, Sox Colin M, Tarini Beth A, Ringold Sarah, Christakis Dimitri A

机构信息

Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.

出版信息

Pediatrics. 2003 Dec;112(6 Pt 1):1238-41. doi: 10.1542/peds.112.6.1238.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The validity of research presented at scientific meetings continues to be a concern. Presentations are chosen on the basis of submitted abstracts, which may not contain sufficient information to assess the validity of the research. The objective of this study was to determine 1) the proportion of abstracts presented at the annual Pediatric Academic Society (PAS) meeting that were ultimately published in peer reviewed journals; 2) whether the presentation format of abstracts at the meeting predicts subsequent full publication; and whether the presentation format was related to 3) the time to full publication or 4) the impact factor of the journal in which research is subsequently published.

METHODS

We assembled a list of all abstracts submitted to the PAS meetings in general pediatrics categories in 1998 and 1999, using both CD-ROM and journal publications. In each year, we chose up to 80 abstracts from each presentation format ("publish only," "poster," "poster symposium," "platform presentation"). We chose either 1) all abstracts in each format or 2) when there were >80 abstracts, a random selection of 80 of them. We assessed each selected abstract for subsequent full publication by searching Medline in March 2003; if published, then we recorded the journal, month, and year of publication. We used logistic and linear regression to determine whether publication, time to publication, and the journal's impact factor were associated with the abstract's presentation format.

RESULTS

Overall, 44.6% of abstracts presented at the PAS meeting achieved subsequent full publication within 4 to 5 years. There were significant differences between the rates of subsequent full publication of abstracts submitted but not chosen for presentation at the meeting (22.2%) and those that were chosen for presentation in poster sessions (40.0%), poster symposia (44.1%), and platform presentations (53.8%). There were no meaningful differences between the presentation formats in their mean time to publication and their mean journal impact factor.

CONCLUSIONS

PAS meeting attendees and the press should be cautious when interpreting the presentation format of an abstract as a predictor of either its subsequent publication in a peer-reviewed journal or the impact factor of the journal in which it will appear.

摘要

目的

在科学会议上展示的研究的有效性一直是个令人担忧的问题。报告是根据提交的摘要来挑选的,而摘要可能没有包含足够的信息来评估研究的有效性。本研究的目的是确定:1)在年度儿科学术协会(PAS)会议上展示的摘要最终在同行评审期刊上发表的比例;2)会议上摘要的展示形式是否能预测随后的全文发表;以及展示形式是否与3)全文发表的时间或4)研究随后发表所在期刊的影响因子相关。

方法

我们利用光盘和期刊出版物,整理出了1998年和1999年提交给PAS会议普通儿科学领域的所有摘要清单。每年,我们从每种展示形式(“仅发表摘要”、“海报展示”、“海报研讨会”、“平台展示”)中选取多达80篇摘要。我们要么选择1)每种形式中的所有摘要,要么2)当摘要数量超过80篇时,随机选取80篇。我们在2003年3月通过检索Medline来评估每篇选定摘要随后的全文发表情况;如果已发表,那么我们记录发表的期刊、月份和年份。我们使用逻辑回归和线性回归来确定发表情况、发表时间以及期刊的影响因子是否与摘要的展示形式相关。

结果

总体而言,在PAS会议上展示的摘要中有44.6%在4至5年内实现了随后的全文发表。提交但未被选在会议上展示的摘要(22.2%)与那些被选在海报展示环节(40.0%)、海报研讨会(44.1%)和平台展示(53.8%)中展示的摘要的随后全文发表率之间存在显著差异。在平均发表时间和平均期刊影响因子方面,展示形式之间没有有意义的差异。

结论

PAS会议的参会者和媒体在将摘要的展示形式解读为其随后在同行评审期刊上发表或其将发表的期刊的影响因子的预测指标时应谨慎。

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