A critical analysis of publication rates of national oncology meeting abstracts in Turkey (original) (raw)
Related papers
BMC Medical Education
There are many parameters that could be used to evaluate the quality of scientific meetings such as publication rates of meeting abstracts as full-text articles after the meeting or scoring with validated quality scales/tools that evaluate individual papers, project proposals, or submitted abstracts. This study aimed to determine the full-text publication rates for abstracts presented at Turkish National Medical Education Congresses and Symposia and to assess the quality of given abstracts. Abstracts presented at national medical education congresses and symposia between 2010 and 2014 in Türkiye were evaluated. Initially, the abstracts were evaluated if they were published as full-text articles in international and national peer-reviewed journals following the meeting. Secondly, the quality of presented abstracts was assessed with the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) scale. Overall publication rate for the abstracts was 11.3%. The publication rate of oral...
BMC Research Notes, 2012
Background: PubMed is a free web literature search service that contains almost 21 millions of abstracts and 8 publications with almost 5 million user queries daily. The purposes of the study were to compare trends in 9 PubMed-indexed cancer and biomedical publications from Egypt to that of the world and to predict future 10 publication volumes. significantly more than those in 2001-2010 (P < 0.05 for all). By 2020, Egyptian biomedical and cancer 21 publications will increase by 158.7% and 280% relative to 2010 to constitute 0.34% and 0.17% of total 22 PubMed publications, respectively. 23 Conclusions: The Egyptian contribution to world's biomedical and cancer publications needs significant 24 improvements through research strategic planning, setting national research priorities, adequate funding 25 and researchers' training.
Publication rate of oral presentations presented at national pathology congresses, 5-year analysis
Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine, 2022
Aim: In this study, the contribution of the oral presentations presented at national pathology congresses to the literature was investigated. Material and Method: A total of 378 abstracts presented at national pathology congresses between 2014-2018 were scanned in PubMed and Google Academic databases. In order to determine whether these abstracts were obtained from thesis studies, they were scanned in the database of the National Thesis Center. The screening was performed simultaneously with the verbal title and authors. The abstracts were examined in terms of the study design, the type of institution where the study was conducted, whether it was a thesis study, the status of its publication in scientific journals, the type of peer-reviewed journal in which it was published, and the time from presentation to publication. Results: 47.4% (n=179) of 378 papers were retrospective and 52.6% (n=199) were prospective studies. 73.5% (n=278) of the studies of the presentations were done in universities, 23.5% (n=89) in training and research hospitals, and 3% (n=11) in other institutions. 16.9% (n=64) of the abstracts were obtained from the thesis. A total of 27% (n=102) of the abstracts were published in a scientific journal as an article. A significant difference was found in terms of publication in prospective studies compared to retrospective studies (p=0.03). University hospitals had the highest rate (25.5%, n=71). The average period of publication of papers in a scientific journal was 15.0 ±12.3 months (0-68.9) months. 61.8% (n=63) of the abstracts were published in SCI(E) journals, 18.6% (n=19) in other international peer-review journals and 19.6% (n=20) in national peer-review journals. Conclusion: We believe that researchers should develop not only oral presentation but also encouraging methods to transform studies into publications.
Publication outcomes of abstracts from the American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting
American journal of hematology, 2017
Researchers presenting abstracts at scientific meetings provide colleagues with early access to their research findings so that they can receive feedback, discuss collaborative science, and explore novel approaches to improving their research. With open access to meeting abstracts, scientists must confirm the scientific validity of their research through manuscript peer-review despite the many strengths of presenting abstracts. Subjective measures of institutional academic success may also include the percentage of abstracts presented at national meetings that lead to subsequent publication of a manuscript, but objective data on this topic is lacking. Thus, we examined American Society of Hematology (ASH) Annual Meeting abstracts to identify predictors of a higher manuscript acceptance rate, and potential reasons for manuscripts not being published. To lay the groundwork for establishing objective measures for manuscript publication success, we compared manuscript acceptance rates for the ASH Annual Meeting to sixteen other Society meetings in thirteen subspecialties. We conducted a University of Alabama at Birmingham Institutional Review Board approved study of publication outcomes for non-malignant hematology ASH Annual meeting abstracts.
Publications
Background: The publication rates of abstracts after they were presented at the National Conference for Clinical Research (NCCR), a scientific conference held in Malaysia, was determined to gauge the scientific value of the conference, whilst providing comparative information with other scientific conferences. Methods: All the abstracts that were presented at the NCCR from 2014 to 2016 were analysed. Keywords from the abstract title, along with the first, second, and last author’s name, were searched via PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus to determine publication status. Results: A total of 320 abstracts were analysed. Of those, 57 abstracts (17.8%) were published. Almost 70% of published abstracts appeared in open access journals that charge article processing fees. Early publications (≤18 months from the conference date) had higher median journal impact factors compared to later publications. Approximately 42% of the published abstracts had collaborations with the Institute for Cl...
Archive of Oncology, 2008
Impact factor (IF) of journals is assumed an adequate measure of its importance in the scientific communication of a defined subject. It is important to have in mind that IF is varying very much in time. The range of IF for journals classified in the subject group ONCOLOGY is analyzed for the period 2000-2006. There are only seven of 127 journals in year 2006 which have IF higher than 10. The highest impact in the analyzed period has the journal CA-CANCERJ CLIN, varying from 24,674 to 63,342, but the important fact about that journal is that it publishes very small number of articles annually. The number of journals on the list also changed from 103 in 2000 to 127 in year 2006. Only one journal from the list is published in German and five are multilingual, all the rest are published in English language. Besides US (66), Great Britain (29), Holland (7), and Switzerland (6), all other 11 countries have few journals, mostly situated in the last part of the list ranked by IF. When choosing where to publish their results, scientists should consider all available facts about a journal - from its IF and the way it changes with time, to its openness, availability in libraries and on the WWW, possibility to keep author rights and put the article in an open access repository, where it will get more attention from authors that do not have access to that journal, etc.
Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology, 2016
Objective: To analyze the publication rates of full-text journal articles converted from the abstracts presented in the 22 nd Turkish National Urology Congress in 2012. Material and Methods: A total of 576 abstracts accepted for presentation at the 22 nd Turkish National Urology Association Meeting were identified from the published abstract book. The abstracts were categorized into subsections such as endourology and pediatric urology. The subsequent publication rate for the studies was evaluated by scanning PubMed Medline. Abstracts published before the proceedings were excluded from the study. Results: The abstracts were categorized as being presented orally (n=155), by poster (n=421), or by video (n=78). Of the 28 (18.3%) of 155 oral and 34 (8.15%) of 421 poster presentations, were subsequently published in several journals until March 2015. The publication rates of the abstracts based on urology subsections were as follows: neurology (25%), andrology (18.6%), endourology (17.2%), urolithiasis (15.3%), general urology (12.5%), infectious diseases (7.14%), pediatric urology (6.25%), uro-gynecology (6.06%), reconstructive urology (5.8%), and urooncology (3.8%). The average time to publication was 11.77 (0-33) months. Conclusion: This is the first study assessing the publication rates of abstracts presented at a Turkish National Urology Congress. It reveals that more qualified randomized studies need to be done to improve the rate of publication.
Research Output and Citation Analysis of World’s Ten Leading Oncology Research Countries, 2003-2012
ABASTRACT: The present study seeks to assess the research productivity in the field of oncology during the period of 2003-2012 at the global level. An attempt has also been made to evaluate the research output of the world’s ten leading oncology research countries. Some of the key areas covered in the present discourse are research output, citation analysis, and h-index. A total of 310,593 publications in the field of oncology during the period were analyzed. The United States accounted for 29.13% of the total research output, followed by Japan (7.27%) and China (7.07%). Of the total global oncology research output, 74.51% has come from ten leading oncology research countries. During the period of study, the research output of oncology has improved considerably with an average annual growth of 8.15%. China is one of the fastest emerging oncology research countries in the period, with an average annual growth of 37.35%.