Key result
Abstracts presented at the 1993 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons meeting achieved a 44% publication rate in peer-reviewed journals after a 5-year period.
Observational (n=573)
Less than half of the abstracts presented at a major orthopedic meeting were subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals within 5 years, highlighting that much presented material remains scientifically unauthenticated.
Clinicians should interpret meeting abstracts cautiously pending peer review; this Level 3 cohort study leaves open whether publication rates have improved since 1993.
What percent of abstracts presented at the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons annual meeting are submitted, survive peer review, and eventually are published? The answer to this fundamental question is important because many national meeting attendees use the unscrutinized information that is presented to alter their surgical practices. At the 1993 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons meeting, 573 abstracts were presented. After a 5-year period, 44% of abstracts presented were published as papers in a peer reviewed journal. The results suggest that for various reasons, the majority of presented material at the Academy meeting has not been authenticated scientifically to be as accurate as papers that survive the rigors of peer review.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Murrey et al. (1999) conducted an observational in Orthopaedic surgery abstracts (n=573). Abstract presentation was evaluated on Publication as a paper in a peer-reviewed journal. Abstracts presented at the 1993 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons meeting achieved a 44% publication rate in peer-reviewed journals after a 5-year period.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: