Smith William A, Cancel Quinton V, Tseng Timothy Y, Sultan Shahnaz, Vieweg Johannes, Dahm Philipp
Division of Urologic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
J Urol. 2007 Mar;177(3):1084-8; discussion 1088-9. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.10.029.
Many abstracts presented at scientific meetings never come to full text publication, which is a prerequisite for the critical appraisal of a given study for its validity, impact and generalizability. We determined factors associated with the publication of abstracts presented at the American Urological Association national meeting.
All abstracts addressing clinical research accepted for presentation at the 2002 and 2003 meetings of the American Urological Association were reviewed. A comprehensive MEDLINE search was performed for evidence of publication in full manuscript form. Data abstraction and literature searches were done between June 15 and August 30, 2005. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the association between abstract characteristics and time to publication.
Of the 1,683 abstracts reviewed 740 (44.0%) were published within a median followup of 27.8 months (range 25.9 to 39.7). Time to publication was associated with abstract origin in the United States and the reporting of statistical testing (HR 1.2, 95% CI 1.0-1.4, p=0.040 and HR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4, p=0.010, respectively). Other variables, such as presentation type, study design, clinical question type and negative outcome, were not predictive.
Nonpublication of research findings is a problematic issue that affects more than half of studies 2 years after presentation at the American Urological Association national meeting. Abstracts from the United States and those providing statistical testing were more likely to be published in full text form. Further efforts are warranted to identify and eliminate factors that hinder publication of research to bring it to the scrutiny of a broad audience of urologists.
在科学会议上展示的许多摘要从未以全文形式发表，而全文发表是对特定研究的有效性、影响力和普遍性进行批判性评估的前提条件。我们确定了与在美国泌尿外科学会年会上展示的摘要发表相关的因素。
回顾了所有在2002年和2003年美国泌尿外科学会会议上被接受展示的涉及临床研究的摘要。对MEDLINE进行了全面检索，以查找全文发表的证据。数据提取和文献检索于2005年6月15日至8月30日进行。进行单因素和多因素分析以确定摘要特征与发表时间之间的关联。
在审查的1683篇摘要中，740篇（44.0%）在中位随访27.8个月（范围25.9至39.7个月）内发表。发表时间与美国的摘要来源以及统计检验的报告相关（风险比分别为1.2，95%置信区间1.0 - 1.4，p = 0.040和风险比1.2，95%置信区间1.1 - 1.4，p = 0.010）。其他变量，如展示类型、研究设计、临床问题类型和阴性结果，均无预测性。
研究结果未发表是一个有问题的问题，在美国泌尿外科学会年会上展示两年后，超过一半的研究受到影响。来自美国的摘要以及提供统计检验的摘要更有可能以全文形式发表。有必要进一步努力识别和消除阻碍研究发表的因素，以便将其置于广大泌尿外科医生的审视之下。
