Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
To quantify the publication rates of the papers presented at the 2007 Brazilian Orthopedics Meeting (Congresso Brasileiro de Ortopedia - CBOT).
METHODS:
Evaluation of the proportion of abstracts submitted by the various orthopedic subspecialties and according to the Brazilian states. Then, a Lilacs and PubMed search was performed in order to determine which presentations generated national or international published papers.
RESULTS:
São Paulo and the Southeast region were responsible for the greatest number of presentations at the congress (54.1% and 68.3% respectively). Shoulder and Elbow were the subspecialty responsible for more presentations (13.8%). Among the 653 studies presented at the congress, 174 (26.6%) were published. Oral presentations obtained a publication rate 3.58 times higher than posters.
CONCLUSION:
The CBOT publication rate is lower than 30%. Many of the papers presented at the CBOT does not pass the scrutiny of scientific journals and therefore should not be the only source of scientific update of the participants: Descriptive Epidemiologic.
Keywords: Scientific and technical publications, Scientific and educational events, Orthopedics
INTRODUCTION
Presentations of scientific papers in national and international conferences are an important forum for the dissemination of scientific discoveries in all areas of medicine. The publication of these presentations in a peer reviewed scientific journal represents the completion of a hard work that was thoroughly analyzed. 1 Previous publication demonstrate that a significant number of conference papers are never published. The publication rates among medical specialties range from 2% to 66%. 2 - 10
The Brazilian Society of Orthopedics and Traumatology is responsible for the organization of the Brazilian Congress of Orthopedics and Traumatology (CBOT), held annually, with more than 5000 participants. The area of Orthopedics and Traumatology, like other medical fields, is an area in continuous evolution. A significant portion of Congress consists of the orthopedic community, not linked to academic centers. The CBOT is an important forum for continuing medical education, and various behaviors and opinions presented in this congress are incorporated into clinical practice by the participants. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the legitimacy of the scientific papers presented. One way to accomplish this assessment is the analysis of the rate of papers published in scientific journals, where the acceptance rigor of the works is known to be greater than that required in congresses. 1
Facing this scenario, the objectives of our study were: (1) to assess publication rates of papers presented at the CBOT in 2007, (2) whether there are differences in publication rates among posters and oral presentations, (3) if there are differences in the number of papers presented between the various sub-specialties, and (4) whether there are differences in publication rates between regions in the country.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Proceedings of the 39th CBOT conducted in 2007 in São Paulo (SP) were used as a database of papers presented at the Congress, being divided into oral presentations, posters and e-posters. In the transcript, the work was divided according to the orthopedic sub -specialty (Arthroscopy, Basic sciences, Spine, Knee, Hand, Shoulder and Elbow, Osteometabolic, Foot and Ankle, Pediatric, and Hip). It was also available the city and state of the service responsible for the presentation. The following data was collected: presentation form, title of the work, first, second and last author, orthopedic sub -specialty and hometown. Posters and e-posters were analyzed together due to the low statistical representation of the latter form of presentation (only 39 works).
After collecting these data, we initiated a search for papers in PubMed and Lilacs databases in order to assess the publishing rates. We use the strategy previously described by Bhandari et al. 5 Initially, we conducted a search in Lilacs by the name of the first author of the paper. In case of a positive search, the items found were evaluated by the title, co-authors and summary to determine if the paper found was the same as the work presented at the congress. If the first search was negative, the strategy was repeated with the second and last authors. After searching Lilacs, the same search was performed in PubMed, following the same strategy. Even in cases where Lilacs search was positive, the same search was performed again on PubMed. In case this search was positive, the following data were collected: the database where the work was found, the journal in which the work was published and the year of publication. In works published in more than one journal, the year of publication evaluated was the one of the first publication. In this situation, we conducted a thorough examination to assess the differences between the two articles. The data were presented descriptively using percentages and absolute numbers.
RESULTS
In the 39th CBOT 653 papers were presented, being 286 (43.8 %) in the form of oral presentations and 367 (56.2 %) as a posters. The sub-specialties that account for more presentations were: (Table 1) Shoulder and Elbow (90 works - 13.8 %), knee (82 works - 12.6%) and trauma (70 works - 10.7%). In reviewing the origin of the works, (Table 2) we found the state of São Paulo responsible for the largest number of presentations (353 - 54.1 %), followed by Rio de Janeiro (52 - 8.0 %) and Rio Grande do Sul (43- 6.6 %). Analysis by the geographic regions in Brazil (Figure 1) shows that the Southeast region had the largest number of works (446 - 68.3 %), followed by the South region (101 - 15.5 %) and the Northeast (71 - 10.9 %). After conducting the searches in PubMed and Lilacs databases, we found that 174 works (26.6 %) were published. From the papers published, 143 were found in LILACS and 55 in PubMed. Of the 286 oral presentations, 118 (41 %) were published, and of the 367 posters, 56 (15 %) were published. Oral presentations were 3.58 times more likely to be published. When analyzing the percentage of publications according to Brazilian regions (Table 3) we observe that 29.6 % of the work from the Southeast were published, 27.7 % works from the South, while no work from the North was published. The Southeast region was responsible for 43 (78 %) of the papers published in PubMed, while the South region published seven papers (13 %), the Northeast region four (7 %) and the Midwest one paper (2 %).
Table 1. Number of presentations by sub-specialty.
| Sub-specialty | Presentations |
|---|---|
| Arthroscopy | 27 (4.1%) |
| Reconstruction | 7 (1.1%) |
| Spine | 69 (10.6%) |
| Knee | 82 (12.6%) |
| Hand | 41 (6.3%) |
| Shoulder and Elbow | 90 (13.8%) |
| Tumor | 56 (8.6%) |
| Pediatrics | 58 (8.9%) |
| Osteometabolic | 11 (1.7%) |
| Basic science | 37 (5.7%) |
| Hip | 36 (5.5%) |
| Foot and ankle | 35 (5.4%) |
| Orthopedic Trauma | 70 (10.7%) |
| Sports Medicine | 34 (5.2%) |
Table 2. Number of presentations and publications by state.
| State | Presentations | Publications |
|---|---|---|
| São Paulo | 353 (54.15%) | 109 (63%) |
| Rio de Janeiro | 52 (8%) | 11 (6.32%) |
| Rio Grande do Sul | 43 (6.6%) | 11 (6.32%) |
| Minas Gerais | 37 (5.7%) | 12 (6.9%) |
| Paraná | 34 (5.2%) | 9 (5.17%) |
| Bahia | 27 (4.1%) | 8 (4.6%) |
| Santa Catarina | 24 (3.7%) | 8 (4.6%) |
| Paraíba | 17 (2.6%) | 0 |
| Ceará | 13 (2.0%) | 1 (0.57%) |
| Pernambuco | 9 (1.4%) | 1 (0.57%) |
| Distrito Federal | 8 (1.2%) | 0 |
| Goiás | 7 (1.1%) | 1 (0.57%) |
| Espírito Santo | 4 (0.6%) | 0 |
| Amazonas | 3 (0.5%) | 0 |
| Sergipe | 3 0.5%) | 1 (0.57%) |
| Mato Grosso do Sul | 2 (0.3%) | 1 (0.57%) |
| Rondônia | 2 (0.3%) | 0 |
| Maranhão | 1 (0.2%) | 0 |
| Alagoas | 1 (0.2%) | 0 |
| Roraima | 1 (0.2%) | 0 |
| Other countries | 12 (1.8%) | 1 (0.57%) |
Figure 1. Works presented at at the 39th CBOT.
Table 3. Publication rate by region.
| Region | Published works |
|---|---|
| Southeast | 132 (75.9%) |
| South | 28 (16.1%) |
| Northeast | 11 (6.3%) |
| Midwest | 02 (1.1%) |
| North | 0 |
| Other countries | 1 (0.6%) |
When evaluating the year of publication of the papers, we found that 22 works were published prior to 2007, and one work was published in 1995 and one in 1999. Most of the work was published between 2008 and 2012. (Figure 2) We found ten articles that appeared in both PubMed and Lilacs because they were published in journals belonging to the two databases. Fourteen papers were found in the two databases in two different journals. After further analysis of these 14 papers, we found that five papers were published in different journals, because they addressed different aspects of the same study, or because they showed a larger sample than the first paper. Nine articles published in different journals (one national and one international) were extremely similar.
Figure 2. Works presented at the 39th CBOT.
DISCUSSION
In this study, we evaluated the rates of publications in scientific journals of the 653 papers presented at the CBOT in 2007. The Southeast region was responsible for the largest amount of work and sub-specialty Shoulder and Elbow had the highest representation. Oral presentations showed a higher rate of publications than posters.
We identified a publication rate of 26.6% of the papers presented at the CBOT. The Congress of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, the largest American Congress of Orthopedics, present a publications rate of 47%, 8 rate substantially higher than the rate found in our Congress. A likely explanation for our lower rate of publication in comparison to the U.S. Congress would be the largest variety of orthopedics journals based in the United States. There is a natural tendency of authors submitting their work to journals of the same language, nationality, and specialty. In our country we have only two orthopedics journals (Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia and Acta Ortopédica Brasileira), which makes publication of national studies harder.
Regarding other medical specialties, Scherer et al. 11 in a systematic review of 79 articles showed a publication average of 44.5 %. In national literature, we found a discrepancy on the rate of publications in other specialties. In the area of urology, the publication rate after the national congress was 39%, 12 in the vascular surgery congress, 6.32% , and 2.9% of the 13 papers presented at a trauma conference were published, 14 while the rate of publication in the general surgery congress was only 2.6% . 7
When we consider the amount of work presented among states and regions, we observed a prevalence of Southeast and South. If we draw a parallel between the work frequency and the amount of accredited orthopedics service in the country, we found a direct relationship. Of the 110 services throughout Brazil , 60 (54.5%) are located in the Southeast, with 33.6% in São Paulo and 13.6% in Rio de Janeiro, 26 (23.6%) are in the South, 13 (11.8%) are in the Northeast, eight (7.27%) are in the Midwest, and three (2.73%) are in the North region. 15 The published works originated from the Southeast were 68.3% (representing 54,1% of the overall from the state of São Paulo and Rio 8%), 15.5% of the south and 10.9% in the Northeast. A possible bias is the fact that in 2007 the Congress has been held in the city of São Paulo, which can lead to a greater number of participants and submission of papers from authors of this state.
The higher publication rate of oral presentations in comparison with posters had already been demonstrated by Donegan et al. 8 who showed a rate of 4 % for the publication for posters and 52% for oral presentations. However, our difference was higher (41% vs 15%). The low rate of publication for posters shows a possibly poor quality of the research presented in this way in the CBOT in 2007.
Our study has some limitations. We only searched the databases PubMed and Lilacs, opting not to perform searches in the Cochrane database, Embase and Google Scholar. This choice was due to the fact that these two databases are the most important in the national literature, but this restriction may have resulted in some false negatives. The restriction to only two databases is in agreement with previous studies that examined publication rates of the Congress of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons which searched only Medline and PubMed databases. 5 , 8 The five year period chosen may also underestimate publication rates, since some works may still be published after this period. However, previous studies have shown that over 90% of papers are published in the first four years after the congress. 6 , 16 , 17
CONCLUSION
We have seen that the rate of publication of the Congresso Brasileiro de Ortopedia from 2007 was 26.6%. The sub-specialty responsible for the largest number of papers presented at the congress was Shoulder and Elbow, and the state with the largest number of works was São Paulo. Oral presentations had a 3.58 times greater chance of being published compared to posters.
Footnotes
Acta Ortop Bras. [online]. 2013;21(5):285-7. Available from URL: http://www.scielo.br/aob.
Work performed at LIM 41 - Laboratory of Medical investigation, Muscle skeleton Systgem, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
REFERENCES
- 1.Arrivé L, Boelle PY, Dono P, Lewin M, Monnier-Cholley L, Tubiana JM. Subsequent publication of orally presented original studies within 5 years after 1995 RSNA Scientific Assembly. Radiology. 2004;232(1):101–106. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2321030819. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Hamlet WP, Fletcher A, Meals RA. Publication patterns of papers presented at the Annual Meeting of The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79(8):1138–1143. doi: 10.2106/00004623-199708000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Jasko JJ, Wood JH, Schwartz HS. Publication rates of abstracts presented at annual musculoskeletal tumor society meetings. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;(415):98–103. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000093902.12372.76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Murrey DB, Wright RW, Seiler JG 3rd, Day TE, Schwartz HS. Publication rates of abstracts presented at the 1993 annual Academy meeting. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999;(359):247–253. doi: 10.1097/00003086-199902000-00028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Bhandari M, Devereaux PJ, Guyatt GH, Cook DJ, Swiontkowski MF, Sprague S, et al. An observational study of orthopaedic abstracts and subsequent full-text publications. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84(4):615–621. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200204000-00017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Scherer RW, Dickersin K, Langenberg P. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. A meta-analysis. JAMA. 1994;272(2):158–162. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Fernandes FAM, Ventura DE, Del Grande JC. Publication index of the papers presented at the XXIV Brazilian Congress of Surgery. Rev Col Bras Cir. 2003;30(5):392–395. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Donegan DJ, Kim TW, Lee GC. Publication rates of presentations at an annual meeting of the american academy of orthopaedic surgeons. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(5):1428–1435. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1171-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.ul Haq MI, Gill I. Observational analysis of BOA free-papers (2001): from presentation to publication and comparison with the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) Injury. 2011;42(4):418–420. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.12.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Varghese RA, Chang J, Miyanji F, Reilly CW, Mulpuri K. Publication of abstracts submitted to the annual meeting of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America: is there a difference between accepted versus rejected abstracts? J Pediatr Orthop. 2011;31(3):334–340. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0b013e31820f8783. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;18(2):MR000005–MR000005. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000005.pub3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Oliveira LRS, Figueiredo AA, Choi M, Ferrarez CEPF, Bastos AN, Netto JMB. The publication rate of abstracts presented at the 2003 urological brazilian meeting. Clinics. 2009;64(4):345–349. doi: 10.1590/S1807-59322009000400013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Yoshida WB, Holmo NF, Corregliano GT, Baldon KM, Silva NS. Indexed publications generated from abstracts of angiology and vascular surgery congresses in Brazil. J Vasc Bras. 2008;7(4):293–297. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Andrade VAD, Carpini S, Schwingel R, Calderan TRA, Fraga GP. Publication of papers presented in a Brazilian Trauma Congress. Rev Col Bras Cir. 2011;38(3):172–176. doi: 10.1590/s0100-69912011000300006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Lech O, Ribak S, Santos JBG. [12/07/2013];Serviços credenciados de residência em ortopedia. 2011 a Available from: www.portalsbot.org.br/public/documents/jornalsbot/ServicosCredenciados_69.pdf.
- 16.Riordan FA. Do presenters to paediatric meetings get their work published? Arch Dis Child. 2000;83(6):524–526. doi: 10.1136/adc.83.6.524. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Roy D, Sankar V, Hughes JP, Jones A, Fenton JE. Publication rates of scientific papers presented at the Otorhinolarygological Research Society meetings. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 2001;26(3):253–256. doi: 10.1046/j.0307-7772.2001.00467.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]