This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow [Supplementary Material]
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bhandari, M.
Right arrow Articles by Schemitsch, E. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bhandari, M.
Right arrow Articles by Schemitsch, E. H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) 84:615-621 (2002)
© 2002 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.


Scientific Article

An Observational Study of Orthopaedic Abstracts and Subsequent Full-Text Publications

Mohit Bhandari, MD, MSc, P. J. Devereaux, MD, Gordon H. Guyatt, MD, MSc, Deborah J. Cook, MD, MSc, Marc F. Swiontkowski, MD, Sheila Sprague, BSc and Emil H. Schemitsch, MD

Investigation performed at the Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Mohit Bhandari, MD, MSc
P. J. Devereaux, MD
Gordon H. Guyatt, MD, MSc
Deborah J. Cook, MD, MSc
Sheila Sprague, BSc
Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Room 2C12, 1200 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada. E-mail address for M. Bhandari: bhandari{at}sympatico.ca

Marc F. Swiontkowski, MD
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Minnesota Medical School, 420 Delaware Street S.E., Box 492, Minneapolis, MN 55455

Emil H. Schemitsch, MD
Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, St. Michael's Hospital, 55 Queen Street East, Suite 800, Toronto, ON M5C 1R6, Canada

The authors did not receive grants or outside funding in support of their research or preparation of this manuscript. They did not receive payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors are affiliated or associated.

Background: Research abstracts are frequently referenced in orthopaedic textbooks and influence orthopaedic care. However, little is known about the quality of information provided in the abstracts, the frequency of publication of complete papers after presentation of abstracts, or any discrepancies between abstracts and published papers. The objective of this study was to determine the quality of information provided in orthopaedic abstracts, rates of publication of full-text articles after presentation of abstracts, predictors of publication of full-text articles, and consistency between abstracts and full-text articles.

Methods: We retrieved all abstracts from the 1996 scientific program of the sixty-third Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. For each abstract, we recorded the completeness of reporting and key features of the study design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation. A computerized Medline and PubMed search established whether the abstract had been followed by publication of a full-text article. Finally, we evaluated the consistency of reporting between abstracts and final publications.

Results: The program included 465 abstracts, 66% of which were on prognostic studies. All abstracts described the study design, and 70.7% of the designs were observational. Key methodological issues were reported in less than half of the abstracts, and information on data analysis was reported in <15%. One hundred and fifty-nine (34%) of the 465 abstracts were followed by publication of a full-text article. The mean time to publication (and standard deviation) was 17.6 ±; 12 months (range, one to fifty-six months). Inconsistencies between the abstract and the full-text article included the primary outcome measure, which differed 14% of the time, and the results, which differed 19% of the time.

Conclusions: Two-thirds of the orthopaedic abstracts in this sample were not followed by publication of a full-text paper. The overall quality of reporting in abstracts proved inadequate, and inconsistencies between the final published paper and the original abstract occurred frequently. The routine use of abstracts as a guide to orthopaedic practice needs to be reconsidered.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
I. Boutron, D. Moher, D. G. Altman, K. F. Schulz, P. Ravaud, and for the CONSORT Group
Extending the CONSORT Statement to Randomized Trials of Nonpharmacologic Treatment: Explanation and Elaboration
Ann Intern Med, February 19, 2008; 148(4): 295 - 309.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur Heart JHome page
M. E. Falagas and E. S. Rosmarakis
Clinical decision-making based on findings presented in conference abstracts: is it safe for our patients?
Eur. Heart J., September 1, 2006; 27(17): 2038 - 2039.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
M. Toma, F. A. McAlister, L. Bialy, D. Adams, B. Vandermeer, and P. W. Armstrong
Transition From Meeting Abstract to Full-length Journal Article for Randomized Controlled Trials
JAMA, March 15, 2006; 295(11): 1281 - 1287.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Postgrad. Med. J.Home page
E Guryel, A W Durrant, R Alakeson, and D M Ricketts
From presentation to publication: the natural history of orthopaedic abstracts in the United Kingdom
Postgrad. Med. J., January 1, 2006; 82(963): 70 - 72.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Reproductive SciencesHome page
S. G. Gandhi and W. M. Gilbert
Society of Gynecologic Investigation: What Gets Published?
Reproductive Sciences, December 1, 2004; 11(8): 562 - 565.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
L. Arrive, P.-Y. Boelle, P. Dono, M. Lewin, L. Monnier-Cholley, and J.-M. Tubiana
Subsequent Publication of Orally Presented Original Studies within 5 Years after 1995 RSNA Scientific Assembly
Radiology, July 1, 2004; 232(1): 101 - 106.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
PediatricsHome page
A. E. Carroll, C. M. Sox, B. A. Tarini, S. Ringold, and D. A. Christakis
Does Presentation Format at the Pediatric Academic Societies' Annual Meeting Predict Subsequent Publication?
Pediatrics, December 1, 2003; 112(6): 1238 - 1241.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JBJSHome page
D. D. Waddell, S. S. Leopold, W. J. Warme, P. D. Pettis, and S. Shott
Acute Local Reaction toIntra-Articular Hylan G-F 20 (Synvisc): Part II
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., August 1, 2003; 85(8): 1620 - 1621.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JBJSHome page
S. Sprague, M. Bhandari, P. J. Devereaux, M. F. Swiontkowski, P. Tornetta III, D. J. Cook, D. Dirschl, E. H. Schemitsch, and G. H. Guyatt
Barriers to Full-Text Publication Following Presentation of Abstracts at Annual Orthopaedic Meetings
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., January 17, 2003; 85(1): 158 - 163.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]