More insight into the fate of biomedical meeting abstracts: a systematic review
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 10 July 2003
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Medical Research Methodology
- Vol. 3 (1) , 12
- https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-3-12
Abstract
It has been estimated that about 45% of abstracts that are accepted for presentation at biomedical meetings will subsequently be published in full. The acceptance of abstracts at meetings and their fate after initial rejection are less well understood. We set out to estimate the proportion of abstracts submitted to meetings that are eventually published as full reports, and to explore factors that are associated with meeting acceptance and successful publication. Studies analysing acceptance of abstracts at biomedical meetings or their subsequent full publication were searched in MEDLINE, OLDMEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, BIOSIS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and by hand searching of bibliographies and proceedings. We estimated rates of abstract acceptance and of subsequent full publication, and identified abstract and meeting characteristics associated with acceptance and publication, using logistic regression analysis, survival-type analysis, and meta-analysis. Analysed meetings were held between 1957 and 1999. Of 14945 abstracts that were submitted to 43 meetings, 46% were accepted. The rate of full publication was studied with 19123 abstracts that were presented at 234 meetings. Using survival-type analysis, we estimated that 27% were published after two, 41% after four, and 44% after six years. Of 2412 abstracts that were rejected at 24 meetings, 27% were published despite rejection. Factors associated with both abstract acceptance and subsequent publication were basic science and positive study outcome. Large meetings and those held outside the US were more likely to accept abstracts. Abstracts were more likely to be published subsequently if presented either orally, at small meetings, or at a US meeting. Abstract acceptance itself was strongly associated with full publication. About one third of abstracts submitted to biomedical meetings were published as full reports. Acceptance at meetings and publication were associated with specific characteristics of abstracts and meetings.Keywords
This publication has 81 references indexed in Scilit:
- Full publication of results initially presented in abstractsCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2007
- Factors associated with acceptance and full publication of GI endoscopic research originally published in abstract formGastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2001
- Short report: Do presenters to paediatric meetings get their work published?Archives of Disease in Childhood, 2000
- Publication pattern of papers presented at the American Society for Surgery of the Hand Annual MeetingThe Journal of Hand Surgery, 1996
- The Publication Outcome for the Papers Presented at the 1990 ABA ConferenceJournal of Burn Care & Rehabilitation, 1996
- Analysis and comparison of research abstracts at AAMS, 1987–1990Journal of Air Medical Transport, 1992
- Negative StudiesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1989
- Are published manuscripts representative of the surgical meeting abstracts? An objective appraisalJournal of Pediatric Surgery, 1987
- Book ReviewMaxcy–Rosenau Public Health and Preventive MedicineNew England Journal of Medicine, 1986
- Fate of Cardiology Research Originally Published in Abstract Form | NEJMNew England Journal of Medicine, 1980