Abstracts Accepted for Presentation at Orthopaedic Trauma or Arthroplasty Conferences: Which Conference Is the Best Indicator of Future Publication?

Eric Potter, Isaac Fernandez, Meghan Fillinger, D. Potter, M. Nguyen, Michael S Reich
{"title":"Abstracts Accepted for Presentation at Orthopaedic Trauma or Arthroplasty Conferences: Which Conference Is the Best Indicator of Future Publication?","authors":"Eric Potter, Isaac Fernandez, Meghan Fillinger, D. Potter, M. Nguyen, Michael S Reich","doi":"10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-19-00020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Time and financial resources pose limitations to orthopaedic surgeons wishing to advance their orthopaedic knowledge, and surgeons frequently must choose one meeting to attend. We sought to determine whether abstracts presented at the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) annual meeting or the trauma (Orthopaedic Trauma Association [OTA]) or arthroplasty (American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons [AAHKS]) subspecialty meetings, respectively, were higher yield with respect to material ultimately being published. We hypothesized that papers accepted by AAOS would demonstrate higher conversion to publication compared with OTA and AAHKS but expected abstract publication rates from OTA and AAHKS to be similar. Methods: All clinical and preclinical abstracts from the trauma and total joint arthroplasty subspecialties presented at the AAOS, OTA, and AAHKS annual meetings in 2015 were evaluated. Data collected included the current status of the publication, journal and publication date, time to publication, and country of origin (United States or international). Results: There were 516 (N = 213, AAOS; N = 303, OTA) trauma and 711 (N = 470, AAOS; N = 241 AAHKS) arthroplasty poster and podium presentations. When comparing publication rates in trauma, no significant difference was observed in overall publication rates between AAOS and OTA at 57.2% (N = 122 published) and 60.4% (N = 183 published), respectively (P = 0.54). In addition, no significant difference was observed in overall publication rates in arthroplasty between AAOS and AAHKS, with publication rates of 65.3% (N = 307 published) and 59.8% (N = 144 published), respectively (P = 0.17). Of abstracts that were published, AAHKS arthroplasty abstracts were more likely to be published in The Journal of Arthroplasty (JOA, 69.4%) compared with OTA trauma abstracts published in the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (JOT, 33.3%), P < 0.001. Conclusion: The overall publication rates, along with publication rates to premiere subspecialty journals, is indicative of forefront research being presented at the three annual meetings. Given the comparable research quality of OTA and AAHKS abstracts, the AAOS meeting appears to provide the highest yield for surgeons with more generalized practices or practices spanning multiple subspecialties.","PeriodicalId":145112,"journal":{"name":"JAAOS Global Research & Reviews","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAAOS Global Research & Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-19-00020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Introduction: Time and financial resources pose limitations to orthopaedic surgeons wishing to advance their orthopaedic knowledge, and surgeons frequently must choose one meeting to attend. We sought to determine whether abstracts presented at the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) annual meeting or the trauma (Orthopaedic Trauma Association [OTA]) or arthroplasty (American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons [AAHKS]) subspecialty meetings, respectively, were higher yield with respect to material ultimately being published. We hypothesized that papers accepted by AAOS would demonstrate higher conversion to publication compared with OTA and AAHKS but expected abstract publication rates from OTA and AAHKS to be similar. Methods: All clinical and preclinical abstracts from the trauma and total joint arthroplasty subspecialties presented at the AAOS, OTA, and AAHKS annual meetings in 2015 were evaluated. Data collected included the current status of the publication, journal and publication date, time to publication, and country of origin (United States or international). Results: There were 516 (N = 213, AAOS; N = 303, OTA) trauma and 711 (N = 470, AAOS; N = 241 AAHKS) arthroplasty poster and podium presentations. When comparing publication rates in trauma, no significant difference was observed in overall publication rates between AAOS and OTA at 57.2% (N = 122 published) and 60.4% (N = 183 published), respectively (P = 0.54). In addition, no significant difference was observed in overall publication rates in arthroplasty between AAOS and AAHKS, with publication rates of 65.3% (N = 307 published) and 59.8% (N = 144 published), respectively (P = 0.17). Of abstracts that were published, AAHKS arthroplasty abstracts were more likely to be published in The Journal of Arthroplasty (JOA, 69.4%) compared with OTA trauma abstracts published in the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (JOT, 33.3%), P < 0.001. Conclusion: The overall publication rates, along with publication rates to premiere subspecialty journals, is indicative of forefront research being presented at the three annual meetings. Given the comparable research quality of OTA and AAHKS abstracts, the AAOS meeting appears to provide the highest yield for surgeons with more generalized practices or practices spanning multiple subspecialties.
接受在骨科创伤或关节成形术会议上发表的摘要:哪个会议是未来发表的最佳指标?
时间和财政资源限制了骨科医生希望提高他们的骨科知识,外科医生经常必须选择参加一个会议。我们试图确定分别在美国骨科学会(AAOS)年会、创伤(骨科创伤协会[OTA])或关节成形术(美国髋关节和膝关节外科协会[AAHKS])亚专科会议上发表的摘要是否在最终发表的材料方面具有更高的产量。我们假设AAOS接受的论文与OTA和AAHKS相比具有更高的发表转化率,但预计OTA和AAHKS的摘要发表率相似。方法:对2015年AAOS、OTA和AAHKS年会上发表的创伤和全关节置换术亚专业的所有临床和临床前摘要进行评估。收集的数据包括出版物的当前状态、期刊和出版日期、出版时间和原产国(美国或国际)。结果:516例(N = 213例,AAOS;外伤303例(OTA), AAOS 711例(470例);N = 241 AAHKS)关节置换术海报和讲台演讲。在比较创伤方面的发表率时,AAOS和OTA的总发表率分别为57.2% (N = 122篇)和60.4% (N = 183篇),差异无统计学意义(P = 0.54)。此外,AAOS和AAHKS在关节置换术方面的总发表率无显著差异,发表率分别为65.3% (N = 307篇)和59.8% (N = 144篇)(P = 0.17)。在已发表的摘要中,AAHKS关节置换术摘要发表在The Journal Of arthroplasty (JOA, 69.4%)上的可能性高于发表在Journal Of Orthopaedic trauma (JOT, 33.3%)上的OTA创伤摘要,P < 0.001。结论:总体发表率以及主要亚专业期刊的发表率表明,在三届年会上发表了前沿研究。鉴于OTA和AAHKS摘要的研究质量相当,AAOS会议似乎为更广泛的实践或跨越多个亚专科的实践的外科医生提供了最高的收益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信