Downloaded from http://emj.bmj.com/ on January 5, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
EMJ Online First, published on December 30, 2014 as 10.1136/emermed-2014-204063 Original article
Publication rate of abstracts presented at the emergency medicine congresses held by the European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) in 2011 and 2012 Asim Kalkan,1 Ozkan Kose,2 Ozlem Bilir,1 Gokhan Ersunan,1 Deniz Ozel,3 Ferhat Guler2 ▸ Additional material is published online only. To view please visit the journal online (http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ emermed-2014-204063). 1
Department of Emergency Medicine, Recep Tayyip Erdogan University Faculty of Medicine, Rize, Turkey 2 Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Antalya Education and Research Hospital, Antalya, Turkey 3 Department of Biostatistics, Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine, Antalya, Turkey 4 Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Antalya Education and Research Hospital, Antalya, Turkey Correspondence to Dr Asim Kalkan, Department of Emergency Medicine, Recep Tayyip Erdogan University Faculty of Medicine, 53020 Rize, Turkey; [email protected]
Received 3 June 2014 Revised 20 November 2014 Accepted 26 November 2014
To cite: Kalkan A, Kose O, Bilir O, et al. Emerg Med J Published Online First: [please include Day Month Year] doi:10.1136/emermed2014-204063
ABSTRACT Purpose The purpose of this study was to assess the publication rate of the abstracts presented at the 6th Mediterranean Emergency Medicine Congress, 2011 and the 7th European Congress on Emergency Medicine, 2012. Materials and methods All abstracts, both posters and oral presentations, from the international emergency medicine congresses held by the European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) in 2011 and 2012 were identiﬁed. To establish whether these abstracts were subsequently published in peer-reviewed medical journals, the names of all the authors and the title of the abstracts were searched for in the databases of Clinical Key/Elsevier, EBSCO Discovery Service, MD Consult, Science Direct, Scopus, EMBASE, Medscape, Google Scholar and local ULAKBIM. The year of publication, consistency of author names and titles, the type of study, the journals in which papers were published and countries from which reports were submitted were all recorded. Results A total of 1721 abstracts were examined; 626 from 2011 (307 oral presentations and 319 posters) and 1095 from 2012 (154 oral presentations and 941 posters). Of all abstracts in 2011, 172 (27.5%) and of all abstracts in 2012, 265 (24.2%) were subsequently published as full-text reports in peer-reviewed journals. Of the 172 papers published in 2011, 152 (88.4%) were accepted by Science Citation Index (SCI) and/or SCI Expanded (SCI-E) journals and 155 (58.5%) of 265 papers were accepted by SCI and/or SCI-E journals in 2012 ( p=0.0001). Conclusions The publication rate of abstracts submitted to international emergency medicine congresses held by EUSEM over those 2 years was low compared with that of abstracts presented in other emergency medicine congresses. Presenters should be encouraged to send their studies to peer-reviewed journals. During the selection process by the scientiﬁc panel, constructive critics should be notiﬁed to the presenters instead of simply accepting or rejecting the studies that submitted to the congress, which may increase the subsequent publication rate.
INTRODUCTION Emergency medicine (EM) is a constantly developing branch of medicine worldwide. Despite its short history, particularly in Turkey, the number of scientiﬁc studies in the ﬁeld of EM is growing rapidly.1
Key messages What is already known on this subject? Previous studies have shown that abstracts from scientiﬁc meetings are not always published, and this is true for emergency medicine as well. What this study adds? The publication rate of abstracts at the European Society for Emergency Medicine international congresses held in 2011 and 2012 was lower than most other conferences. It is not known whether this reﬂects lower scientiﬁc quality, English language barriers or different goals for participants at these congresses. Communication of information within a profession requires a forum where it can be transmitted to a wide audience, and this is classically done through scientiﬁc meetings and journals. Congresses are convenient platforms to ensure the exchange of up to date information and discussion among physicians. The scientiﬁc quality of research studies increases as physicians have the opportunity to share their ﬁndings with professional colleagues at national and international congresses. Presentations at congresses are also a source of inspiration for future studies. Most importantly, the facts and ﬁndings in these presentations are incorporated into clinical practice by the participants. Therefore, the quality of knowledge in these presentations is of the utmost importance. Unfortunately, many abstracts presented at congresses are never published in any scientiﬁc medical journal.2 3 This may be due to shortcomings in the abstract assessment process. In fact, these abstracts are examined by a scientiﬁc panel or a set of referees and undergo a peer-review process, but this evaluation is not as transparent as that of scientiﬁc journals. When an abstract is submitted to a congress, the scientiﬁc panel usually does not see the full text of the study and cannot criticise the study as a whole. No correction is requested, and there is no process of correspondence as there is with journals. Abstracts are accepted or rejected as they stand. This may be the one of the reasons lowering the probability of subsequent publication. The publication rate of abstracts presented at congresses in various specialties ranges from 11% to 78%, thus overall approximately half (48%) of
Kalkan A, et al. Emerg Med J 2014;0:1–5. doi:10.1136/emermed-2014-204063
Copyright Article author (or their employer) 2014. Produced by BMJ Publishing Group Ltd under licence.
Downloaded from http://emj.bmj.com/ on January 5, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Original article abstracts presented at congresses are published in scientiﬁc journals.4 Although several studies have been published regarding the fate of abstracts presented at congresses in various specialties of medicine, there are a limited number of such studies in EM. The purpose of this study was to perform a detailed evaluation of abstracts presented at the international European Emergency Medicine congresses in 2011 and 2012 and determine the subsequent publication rate in peer-reviewed journals and to compare these against previous studies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS A review was conducted of all abstracts, both oral presentations and posters, which had been presented at the 6th Mediterranean Emergency Medicine Congress held in Kos, Greece, in 2011, and at the 7th European Congress on Emergency Medicine held in Antalya, Turkey, in 2012, both of which were organised by European Society for Emergency Medicine (EUSEM) and attracted international participation. Abstracts were accessed from the past congress section on the EUSEM web site.5 A total of 1721 abstracts (626 in 2011 and 1095 in 2012) were presented. To determine whether these abstracts had subsequently been published as full papers in peerreviewed journals, several databases were scanned including Clinical Key/Elsevier, EBSCO, MD Consult, Science Direct, Scopus, EMBASE, Medscape and Scholar Google and the ULAKBIM. During the search process, the name of the ﬁrst author followed by coauthors and the title of the abstract was used as search terms sequentially. In case of a negative search, key words related to the title of the abstract were also used as search terms. In case of a positive search, the items found were evaluated by the title, coauthors and summary to determine whether the paper found was the same as the work presented at the congress. If it was the same study, the following data were collected: the name of the journal and index where it is listed, year of publication, country where the study was performed, the type of study and citations received. Variations in author names, sequence of authors, titles and the content of the summary were regarded as scientiﬁc inconsistency. Papers that were published in journals indexed in Science Citation Index (SCI) and its larger version Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E) were analysed particularly, because these are alternately described as the world’s leading journals of science and technology, because of a rigorous peer-review selection process.
Statistical analysis Continuous variables were stated as mean and SD and categorical variables as percentages and frequency distribution. Statistical comparisons were performed using Student t test and χ2 test for independent samples respectively. A p value