Adrien Quabron

AE Carroll

CC Hoag

Cyrus Cooper

DJ Donegan

F Song

Fanny Buckinx

G Amarilyo

J Song

Jean-Yves Reginster

M Secil

MA Papagikos

Olivier Bruyère

PF Schnatz

R Autorino

René Rizzoli

RW Scherer

S Sprague

Véronique Rabenda

WM Gilbert

Crossref

POSITION PAPERPublication outcomes of the abstracts presentedat the 2011 European Congress on Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritisand Musculo-Skeletal Diseases (ECCEO-IOF11)A position paper of the European Society for Clinical and Economical Aspectsof Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculo-Skeletal Diseases (ESCEO)and the International Osteoporosis and Other Skeletal Diseases Foundation (IOF)Véronique Rabenda1 & Olivier Bruyère1 & Cyrus Cooper2,3 & René Rizzoli4 &Fanny Buckinx1 & Adrien Quabron1 & Jean-Yves Reginster1,5Received: 20 February 2015 /Accepted: 7 April 2015 /Published online: 25 April 2015# The Author(s) 2015. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.comAbstractSummary The publication outcomes of the abstracts presentedduring the ECCEO-IOF 2011 reflect a high research produc-tivity, support the robustness of the selection process conduct-ed by the Scientific Advisory Committee and suggest thatIOF-ESCEO WCO is successful in its mission to promoteand disseminate research.Background and Objective The European (now World)Congress on Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculo-Skeletal Diseases (IOF-ESCEO WCO, formerly ECCEO-IOF)is the largest worldwide event fully dedicated to the clinical,epidemiological, translational and economic aspects of bone,joint and muscle diseases. The role of the Scientific AdvisoryCommittee is to select abstracts for oral communication or post-er presentation based on a short summary of the research. Theaim of the present survey was to determine the publication ratein international peer reviewed journals of abstracts accepted atthe IOF-ESCEO WCO 2011 Meeting (formerly ECCEO-IOF11), the relationship, if any, between the presentation formatof the abstract and its subsequent full publication and the impactfactor of the journal in which research was published.Results Of 619 abstracts accepted at the 2011 ECCEO-IOF11annual meeting, 45 were accepted for oral communication and574 accepted for poster presentation. In the subsequent 3 years(2011–2014), 191 abstracts were published as a full-lengthmanuscript (30.9 %). The publication rate was significantlyhigher for oral communications (75.6 %) than for poster pre-sentations (27.4 %; p<0.0001). Publications derived from oralcommunications were published in journals with a higher im-pact factor (8.3±10.1) than those arising from poster presen-tations (4.0±2.3; p<0.0001), but there was no difference inthe time to publication (OC 16.3 [IQR 8.4–23.3] months vs PP11.3 [IQR 5.3–21.4]; p=0.14).Conclusion These results indicate a high research productiv-ity and an appropriate selection of oral communication by theScientific Advisory Committee of ESCEO-IOF.Keywords Publication outcomes . ECCEO-IOFMeeting .Oral communication . Poster . Presentation formatIntroductionThe European (now World) Congress on Osteoporosis,Osteoarthritis and Musculo-Skeletal Diseases-International* Jean-Yves Reginsterjyreginster@ulg.ac.be1 Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics,University of Liège, Liège, Belgium2 MRC Lifecourse epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton,Southampton, UK3 NIHR Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, University ofOxford, Oxford, UK4 Division of Bone Diseases, Geneva University Hospital and Facultyof Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland5 Department of Public Health Sciences and Bone CartilageMetabolism Unit, University of Liège, Liège, BelgiumArch Osteoporos (2015) 10: 11DOI 10.1007/s11657-015-0216-5Osteoporosis andOther Skeletal Diseases Foundation-EuropeanSociety for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis,Osteoarthritis and Musculo-Skeletal Diseases (IOF-ESCEOWCO), formerly European Congress for Clinical andEconomic Aspects of Osteoporosis-International OsteoporosisFoundation (ECCEO-IOF), is the largest worldwide event fullydedicated to the clinical, epidemiological, translational and eco-nomic aspects of bone, joint and muscle diseases. Researchersfrom various fields of health sciences are invited to submit sci-entific abstracts which are then assessed for relevance and sci-entific value by an independent Scientific Advisory Committee(SAC). Amongst the abstracts selected by the SAC, thoseobtaining the highest ranking are presented as oral communica-tions (OC), while the others are given as poster presentations(PP) during dedicated sessions. Presentation of a study at inter-national meetings allows for a more rapid distribution of currentresearch information [1]. However, members of SAC select ab-stracts for OC or PP based only on a short summary of theresearch. The question arises whether the selection process fororal communications preferentially identifies high quality re-search. If so, then we hypothesized that the publication ratesof subsequent full publications should be greater for oral pre-sentations than for poster presentations [2]. In addition, the im-pact factor of the journals accepting full publications might behigher for oral presentations than for poster presentations. Thus,the aim of the present survey was to determine the publicationrate of abstracts in international peer reviewed journals acceptedat the IOF-ESCEO WCO 2011 Annual Meeting (formerlyECCEO-IOF11), the relationship, if any, between the presenta-tion format of the abstract at the meeting and its subsequent fullpublication and the impact factor of the journal in whichresearch was subsequently published.Material and methodsAll abstracts (n=619) that were accepted for presentation atthe 2011 ECCEO-IOF Meeting were identified from the con-ference proceedings [3] and the meeting website. Abstractswere categorized by presentation format (i.e., OC or PP).Three investigators (FB, AQ and VR) conducted a manualsearch of the online PubMed database for each accepted ab-stract using a predefined search algorithm (Fig. 1). The startdate was the abstract submission deadline. The first two stepsof the algorithm searched published abstracts by entering thename of the first and second authors and the name of the firstand third authors, respectively. If no published article wasidentified after steps 1 and 2, the search was reiterated withthe first author’s name coupled to a list of keywords. Thesekeywords were defined from the components of the abstracttitle. Their number ranged from a single keyword to as manykeywords as needed to reflect the scope of the research. Anabstract was considered published as a full paper if the title,authorship and, if available, the abstract of the full-lengthmanuscript contain substantial similarities to the materialappearing in the abstract published in the congress proceed-ings. If doubt persisted, the full-length manuscript was read inorder to confirm adequate matching between the abstract pre-sented at the Congress and the subsequent publication. Journaltitle, its impact factor (2012) and time to publication (months)were retrieved for each published article. The time elapsedbetween the presentation at the Congress and the publicationof the manuscript was reported based on the BEpub ahead ofprint^ and on the BPrinted^ publication dates. Descriptive sta-tistics are reported as mean +/− SD or median andinterquartiles range (IQR) for nonparametric variables.For the comparison of the publication outcomes accordingto the presentation formats (OC vs PP), we used chi-squaretest for categorized variables and Student’s t test for continu-ous variables and Mann-Whitney U test for nonparametricvariables. We calculated a weighted average impact factor inorder to take into account the number of papers in of eachjournal. The journals which were more often cited were givenmore weight in the computation of the mean. In other words,the weight was allocated based on the number of times that thepaper was cited.ResultsFrom the 619 abstracts that were presented at the ECCEO-IOF11 Congress (45 OC and 574 PP), 191 (30.9 %) werepublished as a full-length manuscript. The three steps of thesearch strategy (Fig. 1) identified 153 (80.1%), 15 (7.9%) and23 (12.1 %) of the full papers arising from the abstracts pre-sented at the meeting. OC had a significantly higher publica-tion rate than PP (75.6 vs 27.4 %; p<0.0001), and the time topublication was significantly (p<0.01) longer for OC whenconsidering BEpub ahead of print^ (p<0.05; OC 14.8 [IQR8.3–23.3]months vs PP 9.2 [IQR 2.7–17.7]months).However, the difference was no longer significant when con-sidering the time to printed publication (OC 16.3 [IQR 8.4–23.3]months vs PP 11.3 [IQR 5.3–21.4]; p=0.14).Approximately 15 % of the full papers were published be-tween the deadline for submission of abstracts and the dateof the Congress. Based on the BPrinted^ publication date, halfof the papers were published within 12 months of their pre-sentation, and almost 80 % of the publications were publishedwithin 2 years of the Congress; the remaining papers beingpublished during the third and last year of the survey.Abstracts presented at the ECCEO-IOF11 meeting resultedin full publication in 81 different journals. Table 1 shows thetop 5 journals that were responsible for 46.6 % of all publica-tions. The weighted average impact factor (IF) of the journalswhere manuscripts derived from the presentations occurring atthe ECCEO-IOF11 congress were published was 4.8+5.111 Page 2 of 4 Arch Osteoporos (2015) 10: 11(median 4.1; IQR 2.4–6.0) and ranged from 0.1 to 53.30. Ahighly significant difference in the journal impact factor(p<0.0001) was observed between manuscripts associatedwith OC (8.3±10.1) and PP (4.0±2.3).DiscussionThe overall publication rate (30.9 %) of the abstracts ac-cepted for presentation at the ECCEO-IOF11 is essentiallysimilar to that previously reported for international con-ferences organized in various areas of health sciences [1,2, 4–13], i.e., ranging from 11 to 78 % [2]. Our surveyonly covers 3 years following the meeting. Most of thepublications dealing with similar outcomes report muchlonger follow-up duration, usually between 5 and 7 years[1, 5–9] and up to 9 years [11]. In the literature, the meanand median time from abstract presentation to publicationare in the range of 18 months [1, 4, 6], and publicationsappearing more than 3 years after the meeting can con-tribute to up to 20 % of the overall publication rate [1].Therefore, the figures reported here for the ECCEO-IOF11, whereas consistent with those found in the litera-ture, are most likely to be underestimated.OC presented at the ECCEO-IOF11 have a significantlyhigher publication rate than PP (75.6 vs 27.4 %). This differ-ence is also reported for other conferences, within the samefield of medicine [1] as well as in other fields [5, 6, 11]. OCalso were associated with publications in journals with ahigher impact factor than PP (8.3 vs 4.0), also in accordancewith previous observations [1, 5].Both the rate of publication of OC and the IF of the journalswere full manuscripts derived from OC presented at ECCEO-IOF11 were published (75.6 % and 8.3) are amongst thehighest cited in the literature and compare favorably even withthe publication outcomes of the clinical oral presentations madeat the American College of Rheumatology/Association ofRheumatology Health Professionals 2006 Annual ScientificMeeting (ACR/ARHP), the most prominent and respectedInternational Conference in the field of Musculo-SkeletalDisorders (71.2 % and 7.1) [1]. The role of the CongressSAC is to assess the scientific merit of submitted abstracts,based on very limited information. These publication outcomesconfirm the robustness of the selection process of OC made bythe SAC prior to the ECCEO-IOF11 Conference.Few differences are reported; in the time needed for publi-cation between OC and PP, an observation already made forother meetings [1, 6]. The mean duration before publication ofNumber of published abstracts identified: 153  (80.11 % of total published abstracts)Number of published abstracts identified: 15  (7.85 % of total published abstracts)Number of published abstracts identified: 23  (12.04 % of total published abstracts)Total abstracts published n= 191 Total abstracts screened n= 619 Step 1: First author and second author n= 158 (25.53%)Step 2: First author and third author n= 15 (2.42%) Step 3: First author and key words n= 446 (72.05%) Fig. 1 Research strategy resultsTable 1 Top 5 journals containing published abstracts from the ECCEO-IOF11 MeetingRank Journal Impact factor (2012) Abstractspublished (n)Total published ECCEO-IOF11 abstracts (%)1 Osteoporosis International 4.580 33 17.282 Bone 4.023 21 11.003 Journal of Bone and Mineral Research 6.373 17 8.904 Calcified Tissue International 2.376 10 5.245 Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 5.967 8 4.19Arch Osteoporos (2015) 10: 11 Page 3 of 4 11the abstracts was also within the expected range, with theunderstanding that, as previously mentioned, our survey wasof shorter follow-up than those described in other publications[1, 6, 8, 10].More than 23 % of the abstracts were published inOsteoporosis International and in Calcified TissueInternational, two journals which are the official Journals ofthe International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF), one of thescientific societies in charge of the program of the ECCEO-IOF11 Congress. Previous reports also highlight that abstractspresented at congresses organized by scientific societies arepreferentially submitted for publication to the official journalsof these particular societies [1, 4, 6, 7, 10].Several authors have conducted surveys to identify the rea-sons given by investigators for not publishing their studies inpeer reviewed journals [2, 14]. Lack of time, ongoing andincomplete studies and author or co-author problems werefrequently reported as main reasons for non-publication.Unfortunately, this information was not available in oursurvey.In conclusion, the publication outcomes of the abstractspresented during the ECCEO-IOF 2011 show an average pub-lication rate of the overall abstracts of 30.9 % but a very highpercentage of the oral communications (75.6 %) publishedwithin 3 years in journals with a high impact factor (8.3).These results reflect a high research productivity, support therobustness of the selection process conducted by the ECCEO-IOF11 Scientific Advisory Committee and suggest that theEuropean (now World) Congress on Osteoporosis,Osteoarthritis and Musculo-Skeletal Diseases (IOF-ESCEOWCO formerly ECCEO-IOF) Congresses is successful in itsmission to promote and disseminate research.Acknowledgments This study was funded by ESCEO and IOF.Conflict of interest Jean-Yves Reginster is co-chair of the WorldCongress on Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Muskulo-skeletalDiseases. René Rizzoli and Cyrus Cooper are the Chairpersons of theScientific Committee of the World Congress on Osteoporosis,Osteoarthritis and Muskulo-skeletal Diseases. Véronique Rabenda,Olivier Bruyère, Fanny Buckinx and Adrien Quabron declare that theyhave no conflict of interest.Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the CreativeCommons At t r ibut ion 4 .0 In te rna t ional License (h t tp : / /creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use,distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appro-priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to theCreative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.References1. Amarilyo G, Woo JM, Furst DE, Hoffman OL, Eval R, Piao C,Parker DS, McCurdy DK (2013) Publication outcomes of abstractspresented at an American College of Rheumatology/Association ofRheumatology Health Professionals annual scientific meeting.Arthritis Care Res 65(4):622–6292. Sprague S, BhandariM, Devereaux PJ, SwiontkowskiMF, TornettaP 3rd, Cook DJ, Dirschl D, Schemitsch EH, Guyatt GH (2003)Barriers to full-text publication following presentation of abstractsat annual orthopaedic meetings. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85(1):158–1633. No authors listed (2011) Abstracts of the First IOF-ESCEO Pre-Clinical Symposium and the ECCEO11-IOF Congress. Valencia,Spain. Osteoporosis Int 22(Suppl. 1):1–4164. Secil M, Ucar G, Dicle O (2007) Scientific papers presented at the2000–2001 European Society of Gastrointestinal and AbdominalRadiology (ESGAR) meetings: publication rates during the period2000–2004. Eur Radiol 17(8):2183–21865. Gilbert WM, Pitkin RM (2004) Society for Maternal-FetalMedicine meeting presentations: what gets published and why?Am J Obstet Gynecol 191(1):32–356. Schnatz PF, Romegialli A, Abrantes J, Marakovits K,Cunningham D, O’Sullivan DM (2008) The North AmericanMenopause Society: from abstract to publication. Menopause15(5):996–10017. Autorino R, Quarto G, Di LorenzoG, De SioM, DamianoR (2007)Are abstracts presented at the EAU meeting followed by publica-tion in peer-review journals? A critical analysis. Eur Urol 51(3):833–8408. Hoag CC, Elterman DS, Macneily AE (2006) Abstracts presentedat the American Urological Association Annual Meeting: determi-nants of subsequent peer reviewed publication. J Urol 176(6):2624–26299. Carroll AE, Sox CM, Tarini BA, Ringold S, Christakis DA (2003)Does presentation format at the Pediatric Academic Societies’ an-nual meeting predict subsequent publication? Pediatrics 112(6):1238–124110. Papagikos MA, Rossi PJ, Lee WR (2005) Publication rate of ab-stracts from the annual ASTRO meeting: comparison with otherorganizations. J Am Coll Radiol 2(1):72–7511. Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E (2007) Full publication ofresults initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev18(2), MR00000512. Donegan DJ, Kim TW, Lee GC (2010) Publication rates ofpresentations at an annual meeting of the American academyof orthopaedic surgeons. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(5):1428–143513. Song J, Li M, Hwang DH, Ricciotti RW, Chang A (2010) Theoutcome of abstracts presented at the United States and CanadianAcademy of Pathology annual meetings. Mod Pathol 23(5):682–68514. Song F, Loke Y, Hooper L (2014) Why are medical andhealth-related studies not being published? A systematic re-view of reasons given by investigators. PLoS One 15(9),e11041811 Page 4 of 4 Arch Osteoporos (2015) 10: 11

Archives of Osteoporosis

Publication outcomes of the abstracts presented at the 2011 European Congress on Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculo-Skeletal Diseases (ECCEO-IOF11)

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs11657-015-0216-5.pdf

Publication outcomes of the abstracts presented at the 2011 European Congress on Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculo-Skeletal Diseases (ECCEO-IOF11)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Crossref