|
Indian Pediatr 2017;54: 128-131 |
|
Factors Affecting
Subsequent Full-text Publication of Papers Presented at the
Annual Conference of the Indian Academy of Pediatrics
|
Sumaira Khalil, Devendra Mishra, *Ruchi Mishra and
#Shalu Gupta
From Departments of Pediatrics; Maulana Azad Medical
College, *ESI Hospital and Medical College, Basai Darapur, and #Lady
Harding Medical College; New Delhi, India.
Correspondence to: Dr Ruchi Mishra, Specialist,
Department of Pediatrics, ESI Hospital and Medical College,
Basai Darapur, Delhi, India.
Email: [email protected]
Received: April 04, 2016;
Initial review: May 19, 2016;
Accepted: December 22, 2016.
|
Objective: To study the factors associated
with the subsequent (over next 9 years) full-text publication of papers
presented at the 44th National Conference of Indian Academy of
Pediatrics (PEDICON), 2007. Methods: All papers presented
at PEDICON 2007 were searched for subsequent full-text publication over
the next 9 years in English-language journals by an internet-based
search. The published papers were compared with the
conference-abstracts. Results: 74 (16%) of the 450
abstracts presented were subsequently published; 61 (82.4%) in
Medline-indexed journals. Majority (50, 67.6%) of the papers was
published within the first 36 mo in journals with mean (SD) impact
factor of 2.62 (1.63). The factors significantly associated with
subsequent publication were papers presented as award papers (P<0.001),
those reporting on Interventional trials (P<0.001), and those
from medical colleges (P<0.05). On comparison of the conference
abstracts with the subsequently published full-papers, 55% had a change
in title; authors were changed in 65%, and participants’ numbers were
dissimilar in 8.6%. Conclusions: There is a need to
identify the factors responsible for this low rate of subsequent
publication, and interventions to improve it both at institutional and
researchers’ level.
Keywords: Conference abstracts, Indexed journals, Research
presentation.
|
D issemination of scientific knowledge is commonly
done through scientific papers presented in conferences. Wider
recognition and dissemination can be achieved if these abstracts get
published in peer-reviewed indexed journals. However, it is not
well-understood what happens to abstracts submitted for presentation at
meetings prior to acceptance [1], and the rigor of the peer-review.
Around 30-40% of such abstracts are reported to get published as papers
in peer-reviewed journals in various fields of medicine [2-4]. PEDICON
is the annual National conference of Indian Academy of Pediatrics (IAP),
the largest body of pediatricians in India, where numerous scientific
papers are presented. Whether these scientific papers are submitted for
publication, or if submitted, how many are able to go through the
rigorous peer review process is unknown. Therefore, we conducted this
study to analyze the factors associated with subsequent full-text
publication of papers presented at the 44th
PEDICON held in Mumbai in 2007.
Methods
All papers presented at the conference were
identified and abstract information was retrieved from the official
abstract book of the conference [5]. A detailed individual
internet-based literature search according to a set-protocol was
conducted by one author each in 2012 and 2014, and by two authors
independently in 2016, and results collated. A follow-up period of 9
years was given to ensure sufficient time for publication of full-text
articles. The internet-based search used the first, second and third
author names sequentially, followed by a full title search. If no
published article matched, then repeat searches with different
combinations of author names and keywords were conducted. The full-text
articles were retrieved by sequential search on PubMed, Google Scholar
and Indmed, and independent websites of the journal. If the full text
article searched was comparable with the abstract in terms of the title,
list of authors, and at least one outcome, the article was considered as
matched.
Data collected included category of presentation
(award paper, oral paper, poster presentation and ‘Taken as read’),
pediatric-subspecialty (adolescent pediatrics, community pediatrics,
cardiology, endocrinology, growth and development, genetics,
gastroenterology, neonatology, hematology, intensive care, infectious
disease, nutrition, neurology, nephrology, respiratory, rheumatology,
and miscellaneous) and the type of study design (intervention trials,
observational descriptive studies, observational analytical studies,
case descriptions, and others, including systematic reviews,
meta-analysis and diagnostic studies).
The full-text articles matching with the abstracts
were compared for any change in title, number of authors (increased or
decreased), change in the sequence of authors, and change in the number
of participants. The papers published were analyzed for time taken for
publication, institutions from where the published papers belonged
(Medical College, Hospital), types of journal (indexed/non indexed) and
Impact factor of the journal.
The data were entered in an Excel sheet, and analyzed
with Microsoft Excel. The proportion of papers subsequently published
was compared between categories of papers, different specialties, and
different types of institutions using the chi-square test. P<0.05
was taken as statistically significant.
Results
A total of 450 abstracts were presented in 44th
Annual Conference of IAP (PEDICON), held in Mumbai, in 2007. Out of
these, 74 (16.4%) papers were subsequently published (61 (82.4% in
Medline-indexes journals); 5 of these were found only as citations
during the search but full-text could not be accessed. The median
(range) duration from presentation to publication was 24 (12,72) months.
Majority (50 (67.6%)) of the papers were published within the first 36
months in peer-reviewed indexed journals with a mean (SD) impact factor
of 2.62 (1.63). Highest proportions (53.5%) of paper published were from
Award paper category. The factors significantly associated with
subsequent publication were presentation as an Award paper (53.5%, P=0.003),
reporting an Interventional trials (42.8%, P<0.001), and those
published from medical colleges (19.6%, P=0.02) (Table
I).
Table I Factors Related to Publications (N=450)
Papers presented
|
Papers published
(n= 74) No. (%) |
*Category |
|
Award paper (n=13) |
7 (53.5) |
Oral paper (n=68) |
10 (14.7) |
Poster (n=291) |
44 (15.1) |
$Taken as read (n=78) |
13 (16.7) |
‡Sub-specialty (at least 15 papers) |
|
Cardiology (n=20) |
5 (25) |
Infectious disease (n=63) |
12 (19) |
Community pediatrics (n=44) |
8 (18) |
Hematology (n=33) |
6 (18) |
Neonatology (n=63) |
10 (16) |
Gastroenterology (n=25) |
4 (16) |
Endocrinology (n=18) |
3 (16) |
Neurology(n=39) |
6 (15) |
Genetics (n=16)Miscellaneous (n=39) |
1 (6)3 (7.5) |
#Institution |
|
Medical college (n=264) |
52 (19.6) |
Hospitals (n=186) |
22 (11.8) |
^Type of study |
|
Intervention trial (n=28) |
12 (42.8) |
Observational: Descriptive (n=118) |
05 (4.2) |
Observational Analytical (n=144) |
36 (25) |
Case descriptions (n=153) |
19 (12.4) |
@Others (n=7) |
02 (28.5) |
$Taken as read: Papers which are
neither presented as oral nor as posters, but abstract is
printed in the abstract book; @Others: Diagnostic
tests/Systematic review and meta-analysis; *P=0.003, #P=0.02,
^P<0.001; ‡P>0.05 for differences across
all sub-specialties.
|
On comparison of the conference abstracts with the
subsequently published papers, only 40% had no change in authorship, or
participant numbers. Of the 69 published papers for which this
information was available, 38 (55%) had change in title, 45 (65%) had
change in author number (increased in 27) and 42 (60%) in author
sequence. Six papers had a different participants number from that
mentioned in the conference-abstract.
Discussion
We describe the various factors associated with
full-text publication of papers presented at an annual conference of the
Indian Academy of Pediatrics, over the subsequent nine years. Only about
one out of six abstracts presented at the conference was subsequently
published in peer-reviewed journals. Papers reporting on interventional
studies, those from medical colleges, and those submitted as award
papers had a significantly higher association of subsequent full-text
publication.
The subsequent full-text publication rate of
conference papers was found to be much lower than what is reported from
medical conferences of various organizations from some other countries
[1-4,6]. In the field of Pediatrics, a study from UK reported a
publication rate of 78% for two general pediatric conferences after an
interval of 3 years [4]. A recent Cochrane review also reported a
publication rate of 44.5% at International meetings [2]. Such
discrepancy could possibly be that researchers submit their best
research-work to these conferences, and the likely stringent acceptance
criteria for papers in these conferences. The differences could also be
because the maximum (34%) abstracts from the PEDICON were
case-descriptions, which are the lowest level of evidence-based
medicine, and have a high rejection rate in most journals [7]. There is
lack of data for suitable comparison with Indian conference in
Pediatrics, but on comparison with other Indian studies in different
fields of medicine, the rates of publications are comparable. Dhaliwal,
et al. [8] reported a publication rate of 16.5% over a period of
seven years after an Ophthalmology conference. More recently, Singh,
et al. [9] reported a publication rate of 13.7% over a period of
five years after a National-level neonatology conference. Some of the
reasons identified for low publication rates in the literature are lack
of time or priority, poor study design, poor grammatical style, and
language barriers [2,12,13].
Mittal, et al. [10] previously reported 37%
publication rate for award papers presented at PEDICON over a period of
13 years, and found papers originating from medical colleges to have a
higher chance of publication. Other authors also report high publication
rates of 47%-83% for award papers [9, 11]. This could be attributed to
high-quality research-work being submitted as award paper, high degree
of motivation for publication if the paper gets an award, and the
full-text article being reviewed for award papers as compared to only
abstracts for non-award papers. Medical colleges have better
research-facilities and institutional support, leading to better quality
of research, and possibly also pressure to publish. Residents working in
medical colleges also are more motivated to write scientific papers in
order to start their journey of research. A Cochrane review reported in
the past, that rate of publication of Randomized or controlled clinical
trials is higher (63%) as compared to other study designs (49.1%) [2].
In our study, 80% of the papers got published in the first 36 months,
and none after 7 years. This was found to be comparable with previous
studies who reported a median duration of 19 months with a range of
12-32 months from presentation to publication [1,14,15].
One important limitation of this study is that we
focused on abstracts presented at only one annual conference, thereby
hindering its generalizability; although results matching a previous
study from an Indian neonatal conference [9] increases confidence in our
findings. The search for full-text article was done on three popular
electronic databases and no search was conducted for journals with only
print editions, thus possibly missing some published articles; though
the number of such articles is likely to be few. Other possible factors
responsible for low publication, specifically those related to authors
or institutions, were not studied; neither was individual contact made
with authors for confirming submission and/or rejection.
The low rate of publications from presented papers
warrants a focused peer-review of all the abstracts with communication
of the reviewers’ comments to the authors, so as to increase the quality
of the papers and thereby the subsequent publication rates. The
presenters also need to put in more efforts to submit their research for
publication, after the conference.
Contributors: RM, SG: independently did the
internet based search, provided intellectual inputs; SK: independently
did the internet based search, literature search, analyzed the data and
prepared the manuscript; DM: conceived the idea of the study did the
literature search, and provided intellectual input in manuscript
preparation;. All authors approved the final version of manuscript.
Funding: None; Competing Interests: None
stated.
What This Study Adds?
• Papers presented as award papers, reporting on
Interventional trials, and those published from medical colleges
are more likely to be published subsequently.
|
References
1. von Elm E, Costanza MC, Walder B, Tramèr MR. More
insight into the fate of biomedical meeting abstracts: a systematic
review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:12.
2. Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E. Full
publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane
Database Syst Rev. 2007; 2:MR000005.
3. Christos L, Nikolaos P, Yijin R. Full-text
publication of abstracts presented at European Orthodontic Society
congresses. Eur J Orthodont. 2014;36:569-75.
4. Hackett PJ, Guirguis M, Sakai N, Sakai T. Fate of
abstracts presented at the 2004-2008 International Liver Transplantation
Society meetings. Liver Transplantation. 2014;20:355-60.
5. Ugra D, Agarwal BR, Manglanai MV, Agarwal RC.
Pedicon Abstracts 2007. 44th National Conference of Indian Academy of
Pediatrics. 2007. Available from: www.iapindia.org/page.php?id=87.
Accessed July 01, 2016.
6. Riordan FA. Do presenters to paediatric meetings
get their work published? Arch Dis Child. 2000;83:524-6.
7. Tyagi A, Chugh V, Kumar S, Sethi AK. Presentation
of research in anesthesia: culmination into publication? J Anaesthesiol
Clin Pharmacol. 2013;29:216-20.
8. Dhaliwal U, Kumar R. An observational study of the
proceedings of the All India Ophthalmological Conference, 2000 and
subsequent publication in indexed journals. Indian J Opthamol.
2008;56:189-95.
9. Singh A, Solanki P, Mishra D. Publication rate of
scientific papers presented at the XXVI annual convention of National
Neonatology Forum (NEOCON 2006). Indian J Pediatr. 2015; 82:25-8.
10. Mittal H, Gupta P. Fate of award winning papers
at annual conference of Indian Academy of Pediatrics: A 13 years’
experience. Indian Pediatr. 2011;48:818-9.
11. Fede AB, Michele da Costa, Miranda MC, Lera AT,
Ueda A, Antonangelo DV, et al. Experience with the ABC Foundation
School of Medicine undergraduate meeting. Rev Assoc Med Bras. 2010;
56:313-7.
12. Hoag CC, Elterman DS, Macneily AE. Abstracts
presented at the American Urological Association annual meeting:
Determinants of subsequent peer reviewed publication. J Urol.
2006;176:2624-9.
13. Castaldi S, Giacometti M, Toigo W, Bert F,
Siliquini R. Analysis of full text publication and publishing predictors
of abstracts presented at an Italian public health meeting (2005-2007).
BMC Res Notes. 2015;8:492-99.
14. Yoon PD, Chalasani V, Woo HH. Conversion rates of
abstracts presented at the Urological Society of Australia and New
Zealand (USANZ) annual scientific meeting into full-text journal
articles. BJU Int. 2012;110:485-9.
15. Schnatz PF, Romegialli A, Abrantes J, Marakovits
K, Cunningham D, O’Sullivan DM. The North American Menopause Society:
from abstract to publication. Menopause. 2008; 15:996-1001.
|
|
|
|