The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) 84:615-621 (2002)
© 2002 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
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.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Facebook  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
C. M. Booth, A. Le Maitre, K. Ding, K. Farn, M. Fralick, C. Phillips, D. W. Cescon, and R. M. Meyer
Presentation of Nonfinal Results of Randomized Controlled Trials at Major Oncology Meetings
J. Clin. Oncol.,
August 20, 2009;
27(24):
3938 - 3944.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Liberati, D. G. Altman, J. Tetzlaff, C. Mulrow, P. C. Gotzsche, J. P.A. Ioannidis, M. Clarke, P. J. Devereaux, J. Kleijnen, and D. Moher
The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration
Ann Intern Med,
August 18, 2009;
151(4):
W-65 - W-94.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Reider
Published...or Perished?
Am. J. Sports Med.,
October 1, 2008;
36(10):
1873 - 1874.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. P. Kleweno, W. K. Bryant, A. M. Jacir, W. N. Levine, and C. S. Ahmad
Discrepancies and Rates of Publication in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Abstracts
Am. J. Sports Med.,
October 1, 2008;
36(10):
1875 - 1879.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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]
|
|
|
|
