- Email: [email protected]
Abstracts From the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons Annual Scientific Meeting: Proportion Published and Time to Publication
SPECIAL CONTRIBUTION J Oral Maxillofac Surg 63:838-840, 2005
Abstracts From the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons Annual Scientific Meeting: Proportion Published and Time to Publication Shahrokh C. Bagheri, DMD, MD,* Nathan Lenox,† David S. Verschueren, DMD,‡ Eric Holmgren, DMD, MD,§ Deepak Kademani, DMD, MD,储 R. Bryan Bell, DDS, MD,¶ and Eric J. Dierks, DMD, MD# Background
name changes, each reflecting the expansion of the specialty. The AAOMS annual scientific meeting has become one of the major conferences in the world for the presentation of original scientific/clinical research in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS). Original research is presented in the form of oral abstracts or poster presentations. The abstracts are peer reviewed and, if accepted, are printed in the Educational Summaries and Outlines publication of the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery prior to the meeting. Academic research is the foundation for advancement and cross-specialty recognition in any field of science. The expansion of this specialty is credited not only to the increasing number of practitioners and the expanding scope of the practice but, more important, to the scientific research, which is the foundation of the surgical practice of the specialty. Since its inception, AAOMS has supported and rewarded clinical and scientific research in the field of OMFS. The purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of abstracts presented at the annual scientific meeting that are published in peer-reviewed journals and the time lag to publication.
Since its establishment in 1918, the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (AAOMS) has gone through extensive change, reflecting progressive changes in the specialty. Initially called the American Society of Exodontists, it was originally formed by a group of oral surgeons in Chicago after the National Dental Association meeting.1 As it has grown, the association has gone through several
*Formerly, Fellow in Craniomaxillofacial Trauma/Cosmetic Surgery, Legacy Emanuel Hospital, Portland, OR; Currently, Private Practice, Atlanta, GA, and Clinical Assistant Professor of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Atlanta, GA. †DMD Candidate, Oregon Health and Sciences University, School of Dental Medicine, Portland, OR. ‡Resident, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR. §Resident, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR. 储Formerly, Fellow in Head & Neck Surgery, Legacy Emanuel Hospital, Portland, OR; Currently, Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. ¶Assistant Clinical Professor, Oregon Health & Science University and Attending Maxillofacial Surgeon, Legacy Emanuel Hospital, Portland, OR. #Clinical Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University and Director of Fellowship in Head & Neck Surgery, Legacy Emanuel Hospital, Portland, OR. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Bagheri: 200 Galleria Parkway, Suite 1810, Atlanta, GA 30339.
Materials and Methods All abstracts published for presentation in the Educational Summaries and Outlines from the AAOMS meetings for the years 1997, 1998, and 1999 were included in the study.2– 4 A MEDLINE search was conducted in a standard fashion to determine if each article was published in a peer-reviewed journal. Article search was done systematically using the first and/or senior author’s first name and initial. Many of the abstracts were published in peer-reviewed journals using modified or synonymous titles. In these
© 2005 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
0278-2391/05/6306-0019$30.00/0 doi:10.1016/j.joms.2005.02.020
838
839
BAGHERI ET AL
Table 3. AAOMS ABSTRACTS FOR 1997, 1998, AND 1999, INCLUDING COUNTRY OF ORIGIN AND PROPORTION PUBLISHED
Table 1. AAOMS ABSTRACTS FOR 1997, 1998, AND 1999
No. of abstracts 446 Published Yes 155 (34.8%) No 291 (65.2%) Oral presentation 347 Published 130 (37.5%) Not published 217 (62.5%) Poster session 99 Published 25 (25.3%) Not published 74 (74.7%) Months to publication Average 23.4 ⫾ 16.2 Range 1 to 72 Journal Published Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 82 (52.9%) Other 73 (47.1%) Bagheri et al. AAOMS Abstracts. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005.
cases, the abstract from the AAOMS publication was carefully compared with the abstract in the respective article to confirm that the same work was being presented. A 5-year interval was thought to be appropriate between the last year (1999) evaluated and the date of the MEDLINE search. The following data was also collected: date of publication, journal published, country of origin, subject category, and format of presentation (poster session versus oral presentation). The number of months to publication was calculated from the date of publication of the abstract in the Educational Summaries and Outlines. A 2 analysis was performed to identify any difference in publication rate based on format of presentation or subject category.
Results Four hundred forty-six abstracts were printed in the AAOMS Educational Summaries and Outlines for the 3
Country
No. of Abstracts
No. Published
Percent Published
United States Austria Brazil Canada China Colombia France Germany Greece Israel Japan Spain Saudi Arabia Switzerland South Korea Taiwan United Kingdom Venezuela
357 6 4 15 4 3 1 1 2 4 14 1 1 3 2 2 22 4
124 5 1 7 1 0 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 1 0 0 8 0
34.7 83.3 25.0 46.7 25.0 0 0 0 0 75.0 35.7 0 0 33.3 0 0 36.4 0
Bagheri et al. AAOMS Abstracts. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005.
consecutive years 1997, 1998, and 1999, of which 155 (34.8%) were published in peer-reviewed journals (Table 1). Therefore, 291 (64.2%) abstracts did not achieve publication as measured by our search criteria through June 2004. There were 347 oral and 99 poster presentations with a conversion to publication of 130 (37.5%) and 25 (25.3%) papers, respectively. The difference between the 2 groups was statistically significant (P ⬍ .05) (2 analysis). The mean time to publication was 23.4 ⫾ 16.2 months (range, 1 to 72 months). Eighty-two (52.9%) abstracts achieving publication were printed in the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. The remaining 73 (47.1%) were published in 34 different peer-reviewed journals.
Table 2. AAOMS ABSTRACTS FOR 1997, 1998, AND 1999, INCLUDING ABSTRACT CATEGORIES AND PROPORTION PUBLISHED
Category
No. of Abstracts
No. Published
Percent Published
Anesthesiology/pain/pharmacology Cancer Cosmetics Dentoalveolar Epidemiology/wound repair Implants Medical/pathology Miscellaneous Neurologic/nerve repair Orthognathic/craniofacial/reconstruction Temporomandibular joint Trauma
44 8 15 17 12 41 47 11 22 131 58 40
14 3 6 7 3 14 21 3 9 37 23 15
31.8 37.5 40.0 41.2 25.0 34.1 44.7 27.3 40.9 28.2 39.7 37.5
Bagheri et al. AAOMS Abstracts. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005.
840 The scientific category of each abstract was documented. The categorization of the abstracts was not consistent among the 3 years of study; therefore, we arbitrarily stratified the abstracts into categories as shown in Table 2. The most commonly published abstracts were in medicine/pathology (48%), and the lowest publication rate was in the epidemiology/ wound repair category (25%). No significant differences were observed between categories (P ⬍ .05). Abstracts were submitted from 18 different countries (Table 3). The majority of the abstracts (357) were from authors in the United States, with a 34.7% publication rate, followed by 22 abstracts from the United Kingdom, with a similar rate of publication (36.4%). The abstracts from Austria had the highest rate of achieving publication (83%).
Discussion The relatively small proportion of presented abstracts leading to publication in peer-reviewed journals suggests that authors and perhaps residency program directors are not routinely pursuing/encouraging the publication of their respective abstracts. It is unclear why many authors choose not to publish, although the significant amount of additional work required beyond the abstract presentation combined with the myriad tasks entailed in completion of residency and starting a practice may play a role. The number of abstracts that were submitted for publication but not accepted is not reflected in this study. A small number of abstracts may achieve publication at a date beyond our search. A 5-year interval was thought to be appropriate between the last year evaluated (1999) and the date of the MEDLINE search. This is an appropriate time to maintain the “currency” of the study and also allow time for authors and journals to publish the material. A similar study conducted in the anesthesia literature looked at the International Anesthesia Research
AAOMS ABSTRACTS
Society’s (IARS) Clinical and Scientific Congress and the proportion of abstracts published and the time to publication.5 In this study, the authors found a 47.7% rate of conversion to publication (versus 34.8% in our study) and a 15.6-month mean time to publication (versus 23.4 months in our study). Our study demonstrated that oral abstract presentations had a higher probability of getting published. Higher-quality abstracts are more frequently accepted for oral presentation by the reviewing committee and therefore may be a reflection of the higher rate of conversion to publication. In addition, we speculate that academically driven individuals are generally more interested in submission for oral presentation of the abstracts compared with the poster sessions. Only about one third of abstracts presented in the AAOMS meeting between 1997 and 1999 were published in peer-reviewed journals. Oral abstracts had a higher probability of getting published. To continue the advance of the specialty with endorsement of our scope of practice in the dental/medical community, it is essential that we encourage the documentation and dissemination of academic research in peer-reviewed journals.
References 1. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons: The history of AAOMS. 2004. Available at: www.aaoms.org. Accessed June 30, 2004 2. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons: Educational summaries and outlines. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 55, 1997 (suppl 3) 3. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons: Educational summaries and outlines. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 56, 1998 (suppl 4) 4. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons: Educational summaries and outlines. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 57, 1999 (suppl 5) 5. Sebel PS, Duensing SJ: Abstracts from the IARS Clinical and Scientific Congress: Proportion published and time to publication. Anesth Analg 92:S110, 2001 (suppl)
Abstracts From the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons Annual Scientific Meeting: Proportion Published and Time to Publication Shahrokh C. Bagheri, DMD, MD,* Nathan Lenox,† David S. Verschueren, DMD,‡ Eric Holmgren, DMD, MD,§ Deepak Kademani, DMD, MD,储 R. Bryan Bell, DDS, MD,¶ and Eric J. Dierks, DMD, MD# Background
name changes, each reflecting the expansion of the specialty. The AAOMS annual scientific meeting has become one of the major conferences in the world for the presentation of original scientific/clinical research in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS). Original research is presented in the form of oral abstracts or poster presentations. The abstracts are peer reviewed and, if accepted, are printed in the Educational Summaries and Outlines publication of the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery prior to the meeting. Academic research is the foundation for advancement and cross-specialty recognition in any field of science. The expansion of this specialty is credited not only to the increasing number of practitioners and the expanding scope of the practice but, more important, to the scientific research, which is the foundation of the surgical practice of the specialty. Since its inception, AAOMS has supported and rewarded clinical and scientific research in the field of OMFS. The purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of abstracts presented at the annual scientific meeting that are published in peer-reviewed journals and the time lag to publication.
Since its establishment in 1918, the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (AAOMS) has gone through extensive change, reflecting progressive changes in the specialty. Initially called the American Society of Exodontists, it was originally formed by a group of oral surgeons in Chicago after the National Dental Association meeting.1 As it has grown, the association has gone through several
*Formerly, Fellow in Craniomaxillofacial Trauma/Cosmetic Surgery, Legacy Emanuel Hospital, Portland, OR; Currently, Private Practice, Atlanta, GA, and Clinical Assistant Professor of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Atlanta, GA. †DMD Candidate, Oregon Health and Sciences University, School of Dental Medicine, Portland, OR. ‡Resident, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR. §Resident, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR. 储Formerly, Fellow in Head & Neck Surgery, Legacy Emanuel Hospital, Portland, OR; Currently, Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. ¶Assistant Clinical Professor, Oregon Health & Science University and Attending Maxillofacial Surgeon, Legacy Emanuel Hospital, Portland, OR. #Clinical Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oregon Health & Science University and Director of Fellowship in Head & Neck Surgery, Legacy Emanuel Hospital, Portland, OR. Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Bagheri: 200 Galleria Parkway, Suite 1810, Atlanta, GA 30339.
Materials and Methods All abstracts published for presentation in the Educational Summaries and Outlines from the AAOMS meetings for the years 1997, 1998, and 1999 were included in the study.2– 4 A MEDLINE search was conducted in a standard fashion to determine if each article was published in a peer-reviewed journal. Article search was done systematically using the first and/or senior author’s first name and initial. Many of the abstracts were published in peer-reviewed journals using modified or synonymous titles. In these
© 2005 American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
0278-2391/05/6306-0019$30.00/0 doi:10.1016/j.joms.2005.02.020
838
839
BAGHERI ET AL
Table 3. AAOMS ABSTRACTS FOR 1997, 1998, AND 1999, INCLUDING COUNTRY OF ORIGIN AND PROPORTION PUBLISHED
Table 1. AAOMS ABSTRACTS FOR 1997, 1998, AND 1999
No. of abstracts 446 Published Yes 155 (34.8%) No 291 (65.2%) Oral presentation 347 Published 130 (37.5%) Not published 217 (62.5%) Poster session 99 Published 25 (25.3%) Not published 74 (74.7%) Months to publication Average 23.4 ⫾ 16.2 Range 1 to 72 Journal Published Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 82 (52.9%) Other 73 (47.1%) Bagheri et al. AAOMS Abstracts. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005.
cases, the abstract from the AAOMS publication was carefully compared with the abstract in the respective article to confirm that the same work was being presented. A 5-year interval was thought to be appropriate between the last year (1999) evaluated and the date of the MEDLINE search. The following data was also collected: date of publication, journal published, country of origin, subject category, and format of presentation (poster session versus oral presentation). The number of months to publication was calculated from the date of publication of the abstract in the Educational Summaries and Outlines. A 2 analysis was performed to identify any difference in publication rate based on format of presentation or subject category.
Results Four hundred forty-six abstracts were printed in the AAOMS Educational Summaries and Outlines for the 3
Country
No. of Abstracts
No. Published
Percent Published
United States Austria Brazil Canada China Colombia France Germany Greece Israel Japan Spain Saudi Arabia Switzerland South Korea Taiwan United Kingdom Venezuela
357 6 4 15 4 3 1 1 2 4 14 1 1 3 2 2 22 4
124 5 1 7 1 0 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 1 0 0 8 0
34.7 83.3 25.0 46.7 25.0 0 0 0 0 75.0 35.7 0 0 33.3 0 0 36.4 0
Bagheri et al. AAOMS Abstracts. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005.
consecutive years 1997, 1998, and 1999, of which 155 (34.8%) were published in peer-reviewed journals (Table 1). Therefore, 291 (64.2%) abstracts did not achieve publication as measured by our search criteria through June 2004. There were 347 oral and 99 poster presentations with a conversion to publication of 130 (37.5%) and 25 (25.3%) papers, respectively. The difference between the 2 groups was statistically significant (P ⬍ .05) (2 analysis). The mean time to publication was 23.4 ⫾ 16.2 months (range, 1 to 72 months). Eighty-two (52.9%) abstracts achieving publication were printed in the Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. The remaining 73 (47.1%) were published in 34 different peer-reviewed journals.
Table 2. AAOMS ABSTRACTS FOR 1997, 1998, AND 1999, INCLUDING ABSTRACT CATEGORIES AND PROPORTION PUBLISHED
Category
No. of Abstracts
No. Published
Percent Published
Anesthesiology/pain/pharmacology Cancer Cosmetics Dentoalveolar Epidemiology/wound repair Implants Medical/pathology Miscellaneous Neurologic/nerve repair Orthognathic/craniofacial/reconstruction Temporomandibular joint Trauma
44 8 15 17 12 41 47 11 22 131 58 40
14 3 6 7 3 14 21 3 9 37 23 15
31.8 37.5 40.0 41.2 25.0 34.1 44.7 27.3 40.9 28.2 39.7 37.5
Bagheri et al. AAOMS Abstracts. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005.
840 The scientific category of each abstract was documented. The categorization of the abstracts was not consistent among the 3 years of study; therefore, we arbitrarily stratified the abstracts into categories as shown in Table 2. The most commonly published abstracts were in medicine/pathology (48%), and the lowest publication rate was in the epidemiology/ wound repair category (25%). No significant differences were observed between categories (P ⬍ .05). Abstracts were submitted from 18 different countries (Table 3). The majority of the abstracts (357) were from authors in the United States, with a 34.7% publication rate, followed by 22 abstracts from the United Kingdom, with a similar rate of publication (36.4%). The abstracts from Austria had the highest rate of achieving publication (83%).
Discussion The relatively small proportion of presented abstracts leading to publication in peer-reviewed journals suggests that authors and perhaps residency program directors are not routinely pursuing/encouraging the publication of their respective abstracts. It is unclear why many authors choose not to publish, although the significant amount of additional work required beyond the abstract presentation combined with the myriad tasks entailed in completion of residency and starting a practice may play a role. The number of abstracts that were submitted for publication but not accepted is not reflected in this study. A small number of abstracts may achieve publication at a date beyond our search. A 5-year interval was thought to be appropriate between the last year evaluated (1999) and the date of the MEDLINE search. This is an appropriate time to maintain the “currency” of the study and also allow time for authors and journals to publish the material. A similar study conducted in the anesthesia literature looked at the International Anesthesia Research
AAOMS ABSTRACTS
Society’s (IARS) Clinical and Scientific Congress and the proportion of abstracts published and the time to publication.5 In this study, the authors found a 47.7% rate of conversion to publication (versus 34.8% in our study) and a 15.6-month mean time to publication (versus 23.4 months in our study). Our study demonstrated that oral abstract presentations had a higher probability of getting published. Higher-quality abstracts are more frequently accepted for oral presentation by the reviewing committee and therefore may be a reflection of the higher rate of conversion to publication. In addition, we speculate that academically driven individuals are generally more interested in submission for oral presentation of the abstracts compared with the poster sessions. Only about one third of abstracts presented in the AAOMS meeting between 1997 and 1999 were published in peer-reviewed journals. Oral abstracts had a higher probability of getting published. To continue the advance of the specialty with endorsement of our scope of practice in the dental/medical community, it is essential that we encourage the documentation and dissemination of academic research in peer-reviewed journals.
References 1. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons: The history of AAOMS. 2004. Available at: www.aaoms.org. Accessed June 30, 2004 2. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons: Educational summaries and outlines. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 55, 1997 (suppl 3) 3. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons: Educational summaries and outlines. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 56, 1998 (suppl 4) 4. American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons: Educational summaries and outlines. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 57, 1999 (suppl 5) 5. Sebel PS, Duensing SJ: Abstracts from the IARS Clinical and Scientific Congress: Proportion published and time to publication. Anesth Analg 92:S110, 2001 (suppl)