The impact of presentations in scientific conferences: Publication and citation rates in trauma surgery.

Abstract

Background: Understanding the publication rates and citation patterns of conference abstracts is critical for program committees and investigators alike. However, the downstream scholarly outcome of conference abstracts remains poorly characterized. We hypothesized that across contemporary US trauma-related scientific meetings, a substantial proportion of conference abstracts would not progress to peer-reviewed publications, and that publication rates and citation patterns would vary by presentation format and conference.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of abstracts presented at four major US trauma surgery conferences from 2017 to 2019. We identified peer-reviewed manuscripts associated with conference abstracts via Google Scholar and PubMed. We collected presentation format, publishing journal, 2024 journal impact factor, and citation count. A cohort of directly submitted peer-reviewed manuscripts was also analyzed. Mixed-effects Poisson regression models assessed the association between presentation and citation counts, adjusting for publication timing.

Results: Of 1,157 abstracts, 762 (66%) were published as peer-reviewed manuscripts. Most manuscripts were published in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery (JTACS) (55%), with 5 in journals with a higher-impact factor than JTACS. On regression analysis, abstracts presented as oral presentations, and published in journals with an impact factor higher than JTACS, were associated with a greater number of citations. When comparing manuscripts presented as abstracts to directly submitted peer-reviewed manuscripts, abstract presentation was associated with 22% more citations (incidence rate ratio: 1.22; 95% CI [1.16-1.29]; p<0.001).

Conclusions: This cross-sectional study of four trauma societies found that approximately a third of presented abstracts did not progress to peer-reviewed publication, with publication rates varying by conference and presentation format. Exploratory analyses found that among those published in JTACS, published manuscripts originating from presented abstracts demonstrated a modestly higher citation count compared with directly submitted manuscripts. Our findings highlight an opportunity to better understand how conference time and investigator effort translate into downstream scholarly output.

Level of evidence: Prognostic/Epidemiological; Level IV.