National identity predicts public health support during a global pandemic

Understanding collective behaviour is an important aspect of managing the pandemic response. Here the authors show in a large global study that participants that reported identifying more strongly with their nation reported greater engagement in public health behaviours and support for public health policies in the context of the pandemic.Changing collective behaviour and supporting non-pharmaceutical interventions is an important component in mitigating virus transmission during a pandemic. In a large international collaboration (Study 1, N = 49,968 across 67 countries), we investigated self-reported factors associated with public health behaviours (e.g., spatial distancing and stricter hygiene) and endorsed public policy interventions (e.g., closing bars and restaurants) during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (April-May 2020). Respondents who reported identifying more strongly with their nation consistently reported greater engagement in public health behaviours and support for public health policies. Results were similar for representative and non-representative national samples. Study 2 (N = 42 countries) conceptually replicated the central finding using aggregate indices of national identity (obtained using the World Values Survey) and a measure of actual behaviour change during the pandemic (obtained from Google mobility reports). Higher levels of national identification prior to the pandemic predicted lower mobility during the early stage of the pandemic (r = -0.40). We discuss the potential implications of links between national identity, leadership, and public health for managing COVID-19 and future pandemics

Do we publish what we preach? Analysis of the European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow Congress publication rates

BACKGROUND: Scientific congresses have become the most expedient method to communicate novel findings on any research topic. However, an important question is whether this information will be published in peer-reviewed journals. Our aim was to determine the publication rate of the abstracts presented at the European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow Congress and analyze factors that may influence this rate. METHODS: A total of 398 abstracts reported in the Abstract Book from the 2008 European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow Congress were examined and categorized by oral and poster presentations, topic, and the number of authors listed. A search in PubMed and Google Scholar for subsequent peer-reviewed publications was performed in September 2015. The time to publication after the meeting had been held; the type of journal and its impact factor at the time to publication were recorded for those abstracts that reached peer-reviewed journal publication. RESULTS: The overall publication rate for the 2008 European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow oral and poster presentations was 45.20% after 7 years. The mean time to publication was 18.53 months, and the mean impact factor value was 2.32. Oral presentations were significantly better represented in journals than posters (64.40 vs. 35.40%, p < 0.001). Abstracts with a greater number of authors listed had better publication rates (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Less than half of the oral presentations and posters at the 21st European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow Congress were published in peer-reviewed journals. Oral presentations with a higher number of authors had an increased likelihood of being published

Are presentations of abstracts at EGPRN meetings followed by publication?

Background: Research presented at scientific meetings is inaccessible to clinicians, unless the findings are subsequently published in a journal. Aims: To assess the publication rate of studies presented at 10 European General Practice Research Network (EGPRN) meetings between 1999 and 2006. Methods: Survey by e-mail or postal questionnaire among all presenters. Results: Information was obtained on 251 presentations (response rate 60%). In total, 113 out of these 251 (45%) presentations had been published. However, only 60% of the research findings were published in English Medline-listed journals, whereas 20% were not Medline-listed. The most frequently cited reason for non-publication was that the paper had not been submitted yet at time of follow up (103 responses). The main reason for non-submission was that the research presented had not been completed yet. Conclusion: Presentations at EGPRN meetings commonly concern research ideas or ongoing research. In this light, the ratio of published work to presented work compares well with the corresponding ratios found for international meetings in other specialist fields. This survey was also meant as an audit of the EGPRN meetings and gives better insight in needs for future strategy