Tasa de publicaciones de trabajos presentados sobre artritis reumatoidea en congresos de Reumatología / Publication rates of papers on rheumatoid arthritis submitted to Congresses of Rheumatology

Resumen Introducción: se publica una minoría de todos los trabajos presentados en los Congresos Argentinos de Reumatología (CAR). Objetivos: analizar los temas de estudio (TDE) de los trabajos sobre artritis reumatoidea (AR) presentados en los CAR y su tasa de publicación. Materiales y métodos: se analizaron todos los resúmenes sobre AR, como motivo primario de estudio, presentados en los CAR entre 2008 y 2017. Se agruparon según TDE, y se determinaron los TDE repetidos definidos como, al menos, dos estudios similares presentados sobre el mismo tema. Se determinó la tasa de publicación, el número de estudios similares por TDE, el número de centros participantes y el número de pacientes estudiados. Resultados: sobre 346 trabajos presentados, 51 (14,7%) fueron publicados. Se publicaron 14 (11,9%) de los 118 estudios sobre TDE repetidos versus 37 (16,2%) del resto de los TDE (p=0,4). Los trabajos sobre TDE repetidos no incluyeron más pacientes ni involucraron a un número mayor de centros. Se encontraron 13 TDE repetidos con al menos tres estudios similares y ningún estudio publicado. Conclusiones: solo una minoría de los trabajos sobre AR se publicó. Un tercio de los trabajos presentados en los CAR correspondió a TDE repetidos, que no mejoraron la tasa de publicación.

Abstract Introduction: only a few articles submitted to the Argentine Congress of Rheumatology (ACOR) are published. Objectives: to analyse the topics of study (TOS) and the publication rate of articles on rheumatoid arthritis (RA) submitted to the ACOR. Materials and methods: every abstract submitted to the ACOR between 2008 and 2017, whose primary research subject was RA, was analyzed and sorted according to TOS. Repeated TOS, defined as at least two similar studies on the same topic, were identified. The publication rate and the number of similar studies according to TOS, participating centers, and patients were determined. Results: out of 346 articles submitted, 51 (14.7%) were published. Fourteen (11.9%) of the 118 studies on repeated TOS were published vs. 37 (16.2%) of the rest of the TOS (p: 0.4). The articles on repeated TOS neither included more patients nor involved a higher number of centers. Thirteen repeated TOS with at least three similar studies, but no published articles were identified. Conclusions: only a few articles on RA were published. One third of the studies submitted to the ACOR are repeated TOS, a fact that does not improve the publication rate.

Fate of rejected manuscripts in the journal Medicina Intensiva during 2015-2017 period.

OBJECTIVE: To know the fate of the rejected manuscripts in Medicina Intensiva journal (MI) from 2015 to 2017 with surveillance until 2019. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Biomedical journals publication. PARTICIPANTS: Rejected manuscripts in MI journal. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Time of publication, impact factor (IF), generated citations and variables associated to publication. RESULTS: The 69% (420) of analyzed articles (344 originals and 263 scientific letters) were rejected, and 205 (48.8%) were subsequently published, with 180 citations of 66 articles. Journal IF was lower in 173 (84.4%) articles. The number of FI-valid citations was higher than the FI of MI in 21 articles. Origin of manuscript OR 2,11 (IC 95% 1.29-3.46), female author OR 1.58 (IC 95% 1.03-2.44), english language OR 2,38 (IC 95% 1.41-4.0) and reviewed papers OR 1.71 (IC 95% 1.10-2.66) were associated to publication in PubMed database. CONCLUSIONS: The rejected articles in MI have a mean publication rate in other journals. Most of these articles are published in journals with less IF and fewer citations than the IF of MI.

Fate of rejected manuscripts in the journal Medicina Intensiva during 2015-2017 period. / Destino de los artículos rechazados en Medicina Intensiva en el período 2015-2017.

OBJECTIVE: To know the fate of the rejected manuscripts in Medicina Intensiva journal (MI) from 2015 to 2017 with surveillance until 2019. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Biomedical journals publication. PARTICIPANTS: Rejected manuscripts in MI journal. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Time of publication, impact factor (IF), generated citations and variables associated to publication. RESULTS: The 69% (420) of analyzed articles (344 originals and 263 scientific letters) were rejected, and 205 (48.8%) were subsequently published, with 180 citations of 66 articles. Journal IF was lower in 173 (84.4%) articles. The number of FI-valid citations was higher than the FI of MI in 21 articles. Origin of manuscript OR 2,11 (IC 95% 1.29 - 3.46), female author OR 1.58 (IC 95% 1.03-2.44), english language OR 2,38 (IC 95% 1.41-4.0) and reviewed papers OR 1.71 (IC 95% 1.10-2.66) were associated to publication in PubMed database. CONCLUSIONS: The rejected articles in MI have a mean publication rate in other journals. Most of these articles are published in journals with less IF and fewer citations than the IF of MI.

Rate and factors influencing the conversion of abstracts presented at the argentinian congress of hypertension meetings to indexed full peer-reviewed publications.

INTRODUCTION: Publication rates vary significantly among different scientific meetings, with many abstracts never being published as peer-reviewed articles. This issue has never been investigated in the Hypertension field in Argentina. Our purpose was to determine the proportion of abstracts presented at the Argentinian Congress of Hypertension meetings that were published as full articles in peer-reviewed indexed journals, the time lag to publication and the factors associated with successful publication. METHODS: we conducted a PubMed search to identify peer-reviewed publications of abstracts presented at the Argentinian Congress of Hypertension meetings between 2006 and 2015, assessing publication rate along with the time lag to publication. We also extracted information about several abstract characteristics and, for those that got published, we recorded the date of publication and journal name with its impact factor and H index. Predictors of publication were analyzed using a multivariable model. RESULTS: a total of 619 abstracts were presented between 2006 and 2015. The rate of conversion to full-text peer-reviewed articles by June 2017 was 28.1% (95%CI 24.7-31.8%), with a median time to publication of 15.7 months (IQR 8-30.9). On multivariable analysis, the independent predictors of publication were basic science category (OR 5 [95%CI 2.3-10.8], p<0.001), oral presentation (OR 2.8 [95%CI 1.6-4.9], p<0.001) and being an award winner for the presentation (OR 3 [95%CI 1.3-6.8], p=0.01). CONCLUSION: conversion rate to full peer-reviewed articles of abstracts presented at the Argentinian Congress of Hypertension meetings is far from ideal, with potential areas where efforts should be concentrated to improve dissemination of knowledge.

Do we publish what we preach? Analysis of Spanish Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Society publication rates. / ¿Publicamos lo que predicamos? Tasa de publicación de los congresos de la Sociedad Española de Cirugía de Hombro y Codo.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to analyse the publication rate of studies presented as podium presentations in the Spanish Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (SECHC) congresses. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-two abstracts presented at the SECHC congresses held in 2007, 2009 and 2011 were included for the purpose of the study. The oral communications were categorized by study type, sample included and follow-up. In June 2017, possible publications of these studies were searched in PubMed. Type of study, delay in publication, journal and impact factor obtained were recorded. The concordance between the information presented at the congress and their subsequent full-text publications was analysed. RESULTS: The publication rate was 17.21% (21 of the 122 abstracts studied) after 6 years, with a mean time spent for publications of 36.71 months, and a mean impact factor of 1.51. There were no differences between results initially presented at the congresses and those subsequently published (P>0.05). DISCUSSION: The majority of papers presented at SECHC congresses do not end up with a publication. The papers that are published do not usually contain significant differences compared to the content delivered at the congress.