Discrepancies of Abstracts Presented in Coloproctology Congresses and Later Publish as Full Manuscripts. A Brazilian Perspective

Q4 Medicine
Hugo Samartine Junior, Nicole Goldenberg Levy, Daniel Ferreira Paiva, Giovanna Bertazzola Gracitelli, Lauro Igor Silva, José Luís Braga De Aquino, Elisa Donalisio Teixeira Mendes
{"title":"Discrepancies of Abstracts Presented in Coloproctology Congresses and Later Publish as Full Manuscripts. A Brazilian Perspective","authors":"Hugo Samartine Junior, Nicole Goldenberg Levy, Daniel Ferreira Paiva, Giovanna Bertazzola Gracitelli, Lauro Igor Silva, José Luís Braga De Aquino, Elisa Donalisio Teixeira Mendes","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1772783","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introduction The purpose of this retrospective bibliometric study was to assess the discrepancies between coloproctology surgery meeting abstracts and subsequent full-length manuscript publications. Methods Abstracts presented at the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology Surgery from 2015 to 2019 were compared with matching manuscript publications. Discrepancies between the abstract and therefore the subsequent manuscript were categorized as major (changes within the purpose, methods, study design, sample size, statistical analysis, results, and conclusions) and minor (changes within the title, authorship, and number of female authors) variations. Results The conversion rate of abstracts in published manuscripts was 6,9% (121 abstracts). There were inconsistencies between the study title (66,1%), authorship (69,5%), study design (3,3%), sample size (39,2%), statistical analysis (24,8%), results (25,6%), and conclusions (12,4%) of manuscripts compared with their corresponding meeting abstracts. Conclusion As changes occur before manuscript publication of coloproctology surgery meeting abstracts, caution should be exercised in referencing abstracts or altering surgical practices based on abstracts content.","PeriodicalId":15408,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Coloproctology","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1772783","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Introduction The purpose of this retrospective bibliometric study was to assess the discrepancies between coloproctology surgery meeting abstracts and subsequent full-length manuscript publications. Methods Abstracts presented at the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology Surgery from 2015 to 2019 were compared with matching manuscript publications. Discrepancies between the abstract and therefore the subsequent manuscript were categorized as major (changes within the purpose, methods, study design, sample size, statistical analysis, results, and conclusions) and minor (changes within the title, authorship, and number of female authors) variations. Results The conversion rate of abstracts in published manuscripts was 6,9% (121 abstracts). There were inconsistencies between the study title (66,1%), authorship (69,5%), study design (3,3%), sample size (39,2%), statistical analysis (24,8%), results (25,6%), and conclusions (12,4%) of manuscripts compared with their corresponding meeting abstracts. Conclusion As changes occur before manuscript publication of coloproctology surgery meeting abstracts, caution should be exercised in referencing abstracts or altering surgical practices based on abstracts content.
在口腔病学大会上发表的摘要与后来作为全文发表的摘要的差异。巴西人的视角
本回顾性文献计量学研究的目的是评估直肠外科会议摘要与随后的全文手稿出版物之间的差异。方法将2015年至2019年巴西结直肠外科大会上发表的摘要与匹配的手稿出版物进行比较。摘要与后续稿件之间的差异被分为大差异(目的、方法、研究设计、样本量、统计分析、结果和结论的变化)和小差异(标题、作者身份和女性作者数量的变化)。结果发表论文摘要转化率为6.9%(121篇)。论文的研究标题(66.1%)、作者(69.5%)、研究设计(3.3%)、样本量(39.2%)、统计分析(24.8%)、结果(25.6%)和结论(12.4%)与其相应的会议摘要不一致。结论直肠外科会议摘要在论文发表前发生变化,在引用摘要或根据摘要内容改变手术方法时应谨慎。
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
Journal of Coloproctology
Journal of Coloproctology Medicine-Gastroenterology
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
47 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信