Related Articles

Abstracts of scientific papers and posters that are presented at annual scientific meetings of professional societies are part of the broader category of conference literature. They are an important avenue for the dissemination of current data. While timely and succinct, these abstracts present problems such as an abbreviated peer review and incomplete bibliographic access. METHODS: Seventy societies of health sciences professionals were surveyed about the publication of abstracts from their annual meetings. Nineteen frequently cited journals also were contacted about their policies on the citation of meeting abstracts. Ten databases were searched for the presence of meetings abstracts. RESULTS: Ninety percent of the seventy societies publish their abstracts, with nearly half appearing in the society's journal. Seventy-seven percent of the societies supply meeting attendees with a copy of each abstract, and 43% make their abstracts available in an electronic format. Most of the journals surveyed allow meeting abstracts to be cited. Bibliographic access to these abstracts does not appear to be widespread. CONCLUSIONS: Meeting abstracts play an important role in the dissemination of scientific knowledge. Bibliographic access to meeting abstracts is very limited. The trend toward making meeting abstracts available via the Internet has the potential to give a broader audience access to the information they contain.

Since it is becoming increasingly laborious to manually extract useful information embedded in the ever-growing volumes of literature, automated intelligent text analysis tools are becoming more and more essential to assist in this task. PubFinder () is a publicly available web tool designed to improve the retrieval rate of scientific abstracts relevant for a specific scientific topic. Only the selection of a representative set of abstracts is required, which are central for a scientific topic. No special knowledge concerning the query-syntax is necessary. Based on the selected abstracts, a list of discriminating words is automatically calculated, which is subsequently used for scoring all defined PubMed abstracts for their probability of belonging to the defined scientific topic. This results in a hit-list of references in the descending order of their likelihood score. The algorithms and procedures implemented in PubFinder facilitate the perpetual task for every scientist of staying up-to-date with current publications dealing with a specific subject in biomedicine.

Objectives

To determine the publication rate of abstracts presented by UK emergency physicians at major emergency medicine meetings, and to identify the site of publication of papers.

Method

All abstracts presented to the annual scientific meetings of both the British Association of Emergency Medicine and the Faculty of Accident and Emergency Medicine between 2001 and 2002 were identified retrospectively from conference programmes. To identify whether the work relating to the abstract had been published in a peer‐reviewed journal, the Medline database (Ovid interface) was searched using the first and last authors as well as key words from the abstract.

Results

Of the 404 abstracts identified, 124 (30%) had been published as full articles. For abstracts presented in the oral sessions, 83 (57%) resulted in publication. A range of journals accepted papers for publication.

Conclusion

The abstract‐to‐publication ratio for UK emergency medicine is lower than for other specialties, but broadly similar to emergency medicine in the US and Australia.

ABSTRACT

A review of the United States Office of Research Integrity annual reports identified 228 individuals who have committed misconduct, of which 94% involved fraud. Analysis of the data by career stage and gender revealed that misconduct occurred across the entire career spectrum from trainee to senior scientist and that two-thirds of the individuals found to have committed misconduct were male. This exceeds the overall proportion of males among life science trainees and faculty. These observations underscore the need for additional efforts to understand scientific misconduct and to ensure the responsible conduct of research.

IMPORTANCE

As many of humanity’s greatest problems require scientific solutions, it is critical for the scientific enterprise to function optimally. Misconduct threatens the scientific enterprise by undermining trust in the validity of scientific findings. We have examined specific demographic characteristics of individuals found to have committed research misconduct in the life sciences. Our finding that misconduct occurs across all stages of career development suggests that attention to ethical aspects of the conduct of science should not be limited to those in training. The observation that males are overrepresented among those who commit misconduct implies a gender difference that needs to be better understood in any effort to promote research integrity.

Background

The purpose of this study was to determine the inter-rater agreement between reviewers on the quality of abstract submissions to an annual national scientific meeting (Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians; CAEP) to identify factors associated with low agreement.

Methods

All abstracts were submitted using an on-line system and assessed by three volunteer CAEP reviewers blinded to the abstracts' source. Reviewers used an on-line form specific for each type of study design to score abstracts based on nine criteria, each contributing from two to six points toward the total (maximum 24). The final score was determined to be the mean of the three reviewers' scores using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC).

Results

495 Abstracts were received electronically during the four-year period, 2001 – 2004, increasing from 94 abstracts in 2001 to 165 in 2004. The mean score for submitted abstracts over the four years was 14.4 (95% CI: 14.1–14.6). While there was no significant difference between mean total scores over the four years (p = 0.23), the ICC increased from fair (0.36; 95% CI: 0.24–0.49) to moderate (0.59; 95% CI: 0.50–0.68). Reviewers agreed less on individual criteria than on the total score in general, and less on subjective than objective criteria.

Conclusion

The correlation between reviewers' total scores suggests general recognition of "high quality" and "low quality" abstracts. Criteria based on the presence/absence of objective methodological parameters (i.e., blinding in a controlled clinical trial) resulted in higher inter-rater agreement than the more subjective and opinion-based criteria. In future abstract competitions, defining criteria more objectively so that reviewers can base their responses on empirical evidence may lead to increased consistency of scoring and, presumably, increased fairness to submitters.

INTRODUCTION

Abstracts presented at national and international scientific meetings are an important educational resource. However, the work is not peer reviewed and little is known about the quality or validity of the presented results and the fate of such abstracts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of abstracts presented to the 1997 annual meeting of the Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland. We examined the rates of full-text publication, time to publication, factors influencing publication, inconsistencies between presented and subsequently published manuscripts, and reasons for non-publication of abstracts.

RESULTS

Of the 241 abstracts presented, 136 (56.4%) were published at a median duration of 18 months. Multicentre studies had a greater tendency to subsequent publication and studies involving academic centres predicted publication in a high impact factor journal. Inconsistencies between presented and published abstracts were common and were significantly associated with delayed publication. Oral and poster presentations were equally likely to be published. Reasons for non-submission of presented abstracts included lack of time, low priority to publish, perceived methodological limitations, lack of novelty of findings and co-investigators leaving the organisation.

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of the work presented at a national surgical meeting in the UK has been subsequently published. Various factors that influence the process of publication and remediable causes for non-publication have been identified.

Motivation:

With the increasing volume of scientific papers and heterogeneous nomenclature in the biomedical literature, it is apparent that an improvement over standard pattern matching available in existing search engines is required. Cognition Search Information Retrieval (CSIR) is a natural language processing (NLP) technology that possesses a large dictionary (lexicon) and large semantic databases, such that search can be based on meaning. Encoded synonymy, ontological relationships, phrases, and seeds for word sense disambiguation offer significant improvement over pattern matching. Thus, the CSIR has the right architecture to form the basis for a scientific search engine.

Result:

Here we have augmented CSIR to improve access to the MEDLINE database of scientific abstracts. New biochemical, molecular biological and medical language and acronyms were introduced from curated web-based sources. The resulting system was used to interpret MEDLINE abstracts. Meaning-based search of MEDLINE abstracts yields high precision (estimated at >90%), and high recall (estimated at >90%), where synonym, ontology, phrases and sense seeds have been encoded. The present implementation can be found at http://MEDLINE.cognition.com.

Contact:

Elizabeth.goldsmith@UTsouthwestern.edu

Kathleen.dahlgren@cognition.com

Background

To date, many of the methods for information extraction of biological information from scientific articles are restricted to the abstract of the article. However, full text articles in electronic version, which offer larger sources of data, are currently available. Several questions arise as to whether the effort of scanning full text articles is worthy, or whether the information that can be extracted from the different sections of an article can be relevant.

Results

In this work we addressed those questions showing that the keyword content of the different sections of a standard scientific article (abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion) is very heterogeneous.

Conclusions

Although the abstract contains the best ratio of keywords per total of words, other sections of the article may be a better source of biologically relevant data.

Annual meeting abstracts published by scientific societies often contain rich arrays of information that can be computationally mined and distilled to elucidate the state and dynamics of the subject field. We extracted and processed abstract data from the Society for Neuroscience (SFN) annual meeting abstracts during the period 2001–2006 in order to gain an objective view of contemporary neuroscience. An important first step in the process was the application of data cleaning and disambiguation methods to construct a unified database, since the data were too noisy to be of full utility in the raw form initially available. Using natural language processing, text mining, and other data analysis techniques, we then examined the demographics and structure of the scientific collaboration network, the dynamics of the field over time, major research trends, and the structure of the sources of research funding. Some interesting findings include a high geographical concentration of neuroscience research in the north eastern United States, a surprisingly large transient population (66% of the authors appear in only one out of the six studied years), the central role played by the study of neurodegenerative disorders in the neuroscience community, and an apparent growth of behavioral/systems neuroscience with a corresponding shrinkage of cellular/molecular neuroscience over the six year period. The results from this work will prove useful for scientists, policy makers, and funding agencies seeking to gain a complete and unbiased picture of the community structure and body of knowledge encapsulated by a specific scientific domain.

This editorial highlights the problem of language barrier in scientific communication in spite of the recent success of Open Access Movement. Four options for English-language journals to overcome the language barrier are suggested: 1) abstracts in alternative languages provided by authors, 2) Wiki open translation, 3) international board of translator-editors, and 4) alternative language version of the journal. The Emerging Themes in Epidemiology announces that with immediate effect, it will accept translations of abstracts or full texts by authors as Additional files.

Editorial note:

In an effort towards overcoming the language barrier in scientific publication, ETE will accept translations of abstracts or the full text of published articles. Each translation should be submitted separately as an Additional File in PDF format. ETE will only peer review English-language versions. Therefore, translations will not be scrutinized in the review-process and the responsibility for accurate translation rests with the authors.

Background

Data from scientific literature show that about 63% of abstracts presented at biomedical conferences will be published in full. Some studies have indicated that full publication is associated with the direction of results (publication bias). No study has looked into the occurrence of publication bias in the field of addiction.

Objectives

To investigate whether the significance or direction of results of abstracts presented at the major international scientific conference on addiction is associated with full publication

Methods

The conference proceedings of the US Annual Meeting of the College on Problems of Drug Dependence (CPDD), were handsearched for abstracts of randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials that evaluated interventions for prevention, rehabilitation and treatment of drug addiction in humans (years searched 1993–2002). Data regarding the study designs and outcomes reported were extracted. Subsequent publication in peer reviewed journals was searched in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, as of March 2006.

Results

Out of 5919 abstracts presented, 581 met the inclusion criteria; 359 (62%) conference abstracts had been published in a broad variety of peer reviewed journals (average time of publication 2.6 years, SD +/- 1.78). The proportion of published studies was almost the same for randomized controlled trials (62.4%) and controlled clinical trials (59.5%) while studies that reported positive results were significantly more likely to be published (74.5%) than those that did not report statistical results (60.9%.), negative or null results (47.1%) and no results (38.6%), Abstracts reporting positive results had a significantly higher probability of being published in full, while abstracts reporting null or negative results were half as likely to be published compared with positive ones (HR = 0.48; 95%CI 0.30–0.74)

Conclusion

Clinical trials were the minority of abstracts presented at the CPDD; we found evidence of possible publication bias in the field of addiction, with negative or null results having half the likelihood of being published than positive ones.

The opinions expressed in the abstracts are those of the authors and are not to be construed as the opinion of the publisher (Canadian Geriatrics Society) or the organizers of the 32nd Annual Scientific Meeting of the Canadian Geriatrics Society. Although the publisher (Canadian Geriatrics Society) has made every effort to accurately reproduce the abstracts, the Canadian Geriatrics Society and the 32nd Annual Scientific Meeting of the Canadian Geriatrics Society assumes no responsibility and/or liability for any errors and/or omissions in any abstract as published.

Background

The evaluation of abstracts for scientific meetings has been shown to suffer from poor inter observer reliability. A measure was developed to assess the formal quality of abstract submissions in a standardized way.

Methods

Item selection was based on scoring systems for full reports, taking into account published guidelines for structured abstracts. Interrater agreement was examined using a random sample of submissions to the American Gastroenterological Association, stratified for research type (n = 100, 1992–1995). For construct validity, the association of formal quality with acceptance for presentation was examined. A questionnaire to expert reviewers evaluated sensibility items, such as ease of use and comprehensiveness.

Results

The index comprised 19 items. The summary quality scores showed good interrater agreement (intra class coefficient 0.60 – 0.81). Good abstract quality was associated with abstract acceptance for presentation at the meeting. The instrument was found to be acceptable by expert reviewers.

Conclusion

A quality index was developed for the evaluation of scientific meeting abstracts which was shown to be reliable, valid and useful.

Many shoulder and elbow abstracts presented at the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) annual meeting are cited in the orthopaedic literature or are used to guide orthopaedic practice, but not all of these abstracts are submitted, survive peer review, or eventually are published. Presuming unpublished works have not been scientifically confirmed, one could question whether it is academically responsible to cite abstracts presented at the AAOS before they are peer-reviewed and published. To partly address this issue we determined the peer-reviewed publication rate for 558 abstracts (233 papers and 325 posters) presented at the shoulder and elbow sessions of the AAOS from 1999 to 2004. In April 2007, we searched the computerized database MEDLINE® and PubMed® for published articles based on these abstracts. We examined the published articles to assess publication rate, time to publication, change in contents, change in authors, and change in conclusions of abstracts. The overall publication rate in peer-reviewed journals was 58% (321 of 558), similar to other orthopaedic meetings and medical disciplines. We believe it is unacceptable to cite shoulder and elbow abstracts submitted to the AAOS because only slightly more than ½ (58%) of them are authenticated scientifically.

Observer variability affects virtually all aspects of clinical medicine and investigation. One important aspect, not previously examined, is the selection of abstracts for presentation at national medical meetings. In the present study, 109 abstracts, submitted to the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease, were evaluated by three “blind” reviewers for originality, design-execution, importance, and overall scientific merit. Of the 77 abstracts rated for all parameters by all observers, interobserver agreement ranged between 81 and 88%. However, corresponding intraclass correlations varied between 0.16 (approaching statistical significance) and 0.37 (p < 0.01). Specific tests of systematic differences in scoring revealed statistically significant levels of observer bias on most of the abstract components. Moreover, the mean differences in interobserver ratings were quite small compared to the standard deviations of these differences. These results emphasize the importance of evaluating the simple percentage of rater agreement within the broader context of observer variability and systematic bias.

Background

The Immune Epitope Database contains information on immune epitopes curated manually from the scientific literature. Like similar projects in other knowledge domains, significant effort is spent on identifying which articles are relevant for this purpose.

Results

We here report our experience in automating this process using Naïve Bayes classifiers trained on 20,910 abstracts classified by domain experts. Improvements on the basic classifier performance were made by a) utilizing information stored in PubMed beyond the abstract itself b) applying standard feature selection criteria and c) extracting domain specific feature patterns that e.g. identify peptides sequences. We have implemented the classifier into the curation process determining if abstracts are clearly relevant, clearly irrelevant, or if no certain classification can be made, in which case the abstracts are manually classified. Testing this classification scheme on an independent dataset, we achieve 95% sensitivity and specificity in the 51.1% of abstracts that were automatically classified.

Conclusion

By implementing text classification, we have sped up the reference selection process without sacrificing sensitivity or specificity of the human expert classification. This study provides both practical recommendations for users of text classification tools, as well as a large dataset which can serve as a benchmark for tool developers.

Background

Medical studies are more likely to report favorable findings when a conflict of interest is declared. We aim to quantify and determine the effect of author disclosure of conflict of interest on scientific reporting.

Methods

Abstracts from an international spine research meeting (North American Spine Society 2010) were selected that specifically evaluated a device, biologic, or proprietary procedure. They were then made anonymous to reviewers. An item of interest was established in each of the abstracts in order to standardize evaluation. Next, three blinded reviewers independently rated the abstracts as favorable, neutral, or unfavorable with regard to the item of interest. Additionally, the blinded reviewers attempted to predict whether a related disclosure was made. The meeting disclosure index was used to tabulate the minimum US dollar value attributable to disclosures.

Results

Of the 344 total abstracts, 76 met inclusion criteria. In 79%, a related conflict of interest was reported. The amount of the disclosure was incompletely reported in 30% of cases. Where available, it averaged a cumulative minimum of $219,634 USD per abstract. The results of the abstracts were judged to be favorable, neutral, and unfavorable in 63%, 32% and 5% of abstracts, respectively. There was no correlation between the presence of a related disclosure and the findings of the studies (p = 0.81), although interpretation of this is limited by a small sample size and an overall apparent bias to report favorable studies. Additionally, the blinded reviewers were unable to predict whether a related disclosure was made (p = 0.40).

Conclusion

No association existed between the presence of a related disclosure and the results of the studies. While the actual compliance with reporting a potential conflict of interest is unable to be determined, the value amount related to the disclosures made was inadequately reported according to meeting guidelines.

Background

The practice of evidence-based medicine (EBM) requires clinicians to integrate their expertise with the latest scientific research. But this is becoming increasingly difficult with the growing numbers of published articles. There is a clear need for better tools to improve clinician's ability to search the primary literature. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are the most reliable source of evidence documenting the efficacy of treatment options. This paper describes the retrieval of key sentences from abstracts of RCTs as a step towards helping users find relevant facts about the experimental design of clinical studies.

Method

Using Conditional Random Fields (CRFs), a popular and successful method for natural language processing problems, sentences referring to Intervention, Participants and Outcome Measures are automatically categorized. This is done by extending a previous approach for labeling sentences in an abstract for general categories associated with scientific argumentation or rhetorical roles: Aim, Method, Results and Conclusion. Methods are tested on several corpora of RCT abstracts. First structured abstracts with headings specifically indicating Intervention, Participant and Outcome Measures are used. Also a manually annotated corpus of structured and unstructured abstracts is prepared for testing a classifier that identifies sentences belonging to each category.

Results

Using CRFs, sentences can be labeled for the four rhetorical roles with F-scores from 0.93–0.98. This outperforms the use of Support Vector Machines. Furthermore, sentences can be automatically labeled for Intervention, Participant and Outcome Measures, in unstructured and structured abstracts where the section headings do not specifically indicate these three topics. F-scores of up to 0.83 and 0.84 are obtained for Intervention and Outcome Measure sentences.

Conclusion

Results indicate that some of the methodological elements of RCTs are identifiable at the sentence level in both structured and unstructured abstract reports. This is promising in that sentences labeled automatically could potentially form concise summaries, assist in information retrieval and finer-grained extraction.

OBJECTIVES: To review the scientific data on the role of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) in sexual transmission of HIV infection and discuss the implications of these findings for HIV and STD prevention policy and practice. METHODS: Articles were selected from a review of Medline, accessed with the OVID search engine. The search covered articles from January 1987 to September 1998 and yielded 2101 articles. Methods used to uncover articles which might have been missed included searching for related articles by author, and combing literature reviews. In addition, all abstracts under the category "sexually transmitted diseases" from the XI and XII International Conferences on AIDS (Vancouver 1996 and Geneva 1998) and other relevant scientific meetings were reviewed. Efforts were made to locate journal articles which resulted from the research reported in the identified abstracts. All original journal articles and abstracts which met one of the following criteria were included: (1) studies of the biological plausibility or mechanism of facilitation of HIV infectiousness or susceptibility by STDs, (2) prospective cohort studies (longitudinal or nested case-control) which estimate the risk of HIV infection associated with specific STDs or STD syndromes, or (3) intervention studies which quantitate the effect which STD treatment can have on HIV incidence. RESULTS: Strong evidence indicates that both ulcerative and non-ulcerative STDs promote HIV transmission by augmenting HIV infectiousness and HIV susceptibility via a variety of biological mechanisms. These effects are reflected in the risk estimates found in numerous prospective studies from four continents which range from 2.0 to 23.5, with most clustering between 2 and 5. The relative importance of ulcerative and non-ulcerative STDs appears to be complex. Owing to the greater frequency of non-ulcerative STDs in many populations, these infections may be responsible for more HIV transmission than genital ulcers. However, the limited reciprocal impact of HIV infection on non-ulcerative STDs and the evidence that non-ulcerative STDs may increase risk primarily for the receptive partner (rather than bidirectionally) may modulate the impact of these diseases. The results of two community level randomised, controlled intervention trials conducted in Africa suggest that timely provision of STD services can substantially reduce HIV incidence, but raise additional questions about the optimal way to target and implement these services to achieve the greatest effect on HIV transmission. CONCLUSIONS: Available data leave little doubt that other STDs facilitate HIV transmission through direct, biological mechanisms and that early STD treatment should be part of a high quality, comprehensive HIV prevention strategy. Policy makers, HIV prevention programme managers, and providers should focus initial implementation efforts on three key areas: (i) improving access to and quality of STD clinical services; (ii) promoting early and effective STD related healthcare behaviours; and (iii) establishing surveillance systems to monitor STD and HIV trends and their interrelations. 




Background

A better understanding of the mechanisms of an enzyme's functionality and stability, as well as knowledge and impact of mutations is crucial for researchers working with enzymes. Though, several of the enzymes' databases are currently available, scientific literature still remains at large for up-to-date source of learning the effects of a mutation on an enzyme. However, going through vast amounts of scientific documents to extract the information on desired mutation has always been a time consuming process. In this paper, therefore, we describe an unique method, termed as EnzyMiner, which automatically identifies the PubMed abstracts that contain information on the impact of a protein level mutation on the stability and/or the activity of a given enzyme.

Results

We present an automated system which identifies the abstracts that contain an amino-acid-level mutation and then classifies them according to the mutation's effect on the enzyme. In the case of mutation identification, MuGeX, an automated mutation-gene extraction system has an accuracy of 93.1% with a 91.5 F-measure. For impact analysis, document classification is performed to identify the abstracts that contain a change in enzyme's stability or activity resulting from the mutation. The system was trained on lipases and tested on amylases with an accuracy of 85%.

Conclusion

EnzyMiner identifies the abstracts that contain a protein mutation for a given enzyme and checks whether the abstract is related to a disease with the help of information extraction and machine learning techniques. For disease related abstracts, the mutation list and direct links to the abstracts are retrieved from the system and displayed on the Web. For those abstracts that are related to non-diseases, in addition to having the mutation list, the abstracts are also categorized into two groups. These two groups determine whether the mutation has an effect on the enzyme's stability or functionality followed by displaying these on the web.

The Open Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) Foundry is a coordinated community-wide effort to develop ontologies that support the annotation and integration of scientific data. In work supported by the National Database of Autism Research (NDAR), we are developing an ontology of autism that extends the ontologies available in the OBO Foundry. We undertook a systematic literature review to identify domain terms and relationships relevant to autism phenotypes. To enable user queries and inferences about such phenotypes using data in the NDAR repository, we augmented the domain ontology with an information model. In this paper, we show how our approach, using a combination of description logic and rule-based reasoning, enables high-level phenotypic abstractions to be inferred from subject-specific data. Our integrated domain ontology–information model approach allows scientific data repositories to be augmented with rule-based abstractions that facilitate the ability of researchers to undertake data analysis.

People are remarkably smart: they use language, possess complex motor skills, make non-trivial inferences, develop and use scientific theories, make laws, and adapt to complex dynamic environments. Much of this knowledge requires concepts and this paper focuses on how people acquire concepts. It is argued that conceptual development progresses from simple perceptual grouping to highly abstract scientific concepts. This proposal of conceptual development has four parts. First, it is argued that categories in the world have different structure. Second, there might be different learning systems (sub-served by different brain mechanisms) that evolved to learn categories of differing structures. Third, these systems exhibit differential maturational course, which affects how categories of different structures are learned in the course of development. And finally, an interaction of these components may result in the developmental transition from perceptual groupings to more abstract concepts. This paper reviews a large body of empirical evidence supporting this proposal.

The results of research are often first presented to peer groups or in abstract form at meetings or scientific conferences. However, these presentations are often based on partial results and are modified during the peer-review and publication process. In addition to the sporadic attendance of surgeons at these annual meetings, few of these ideas and concepts are, therefore, widely disseminated and, ultimately, never published. Recent studies have reported that less than one-half of abstracts reach successful publication and, although many factors contribute to this failure, it nevertheless hinders advances in clinical practice. This study quantified the rates of publication from three major annual North American plastic surgery meetings. The authors draw conclusions regarding the importance of conversion to final publication from a clinical and academic perspective.

BACKGROUND:

Advancements in clinical decision-making are influenced by presentations made at scientific conferences or publications in journals with extensive readership. However, many ideas shared at annual conferences fail to be published, and most surgeons attend these meetings only sporadically.

OBJECTIVE:

To quantify the conversion rates of meeting presentations to publications in North American plastic surgery.

METHODS:

MEDLINE (OvidSP) and PubMed databases were cross-referenced with abstracts accepted for podium presentation at the Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and American Association of Plastic Surgeons annual meetings from 2003 to 2007. Parameters reviewed included publication rate, time to publication, subspecialty, trial type, publication journal and journal impact factor.

RESULTS:

Over the five-year study period, 45.00% of the 888 presentations were published in peer-reviewed journals. The mean time to publication was 22 months (range 1.00 to 85.90 months). In total, 57.00% of the 400 publications appeared in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery; 47.20% of publications were case series study design. The majority of publications were of the reconstruction subspecialty (31.00%). Abstracts from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons had the highest conversion rate (57.70%). Publications based on abstracts presented at the American Association of Plastic Surgeons had the highest mean journal impact factor (2.33). The Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons had the highest total number of publications (n=161).

CONCLUSIONS:

From the three North American annual general meetings reviewed, there was a modest conversion rate of mainly reconstructive case series published predominantly in a single journal, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Several years often pass from the genesis of a research hypothesis to final publication, and because the majority of presentations fail to be published, presentations should be observed with a critical eye given the more stringent peer review process and time required for final publication. In an effort to improve conversion rates, departments and faculty members must foster a culture that prioritizes publication.

Objective To measure the effect of free access to the scientific literature on article downloads and citations.

Design Randomised controlled trial.

Setting 11 journals published by the American Physiological Society.

Participants 1619 research articles and reviews.

Main outcome measures Article readership (measured as downloads of full text, PDFs, and abstracts) and number of unique visitors (internet protocol addresses). Citations to articles were gathered from the Institute for Scientific Information after one year.

Interventions Random assignment on online publication of articles published in 11 scientific journals to open access (treatment) or subscription access (control).

Results Articles assigned to open access were associated with 89% more full text downloads (95% confidence interval 76% to 103%), 42% more PDF downloads (32% to 52%), and 23% more unique visitors (16% to 30%), but 24% fewer abstract downloads (−29% to −19%) than subscription access articles in the first six months after publication. Open access articles were no more likely to be cited than subscription access articles in the first year after publication. Fifty nine per cent of open access articles (146 of 247) were cited nine to 12 months after publication compared with 63% (859 of 1372) of subscription access articles. Logistic and negative binomial regression analysis of article citation counts confirmed no citation advantage for open access articles.

Conclusions Open access publishing may reach more readers than subscription access publishing. No evidence was found of a citation advantage for open access articles in the first year after publication. The citation advantage from open access reported widely in the literature may be an artefact of other causes.

Motivation: The automatic analysis of scientific literature can support authors in writing their manuscripts.

Implementation: PaperMaker is a novel IT solution that receives a scientific manuscript via a Web interface, automatically analyses the publication, evaluates consistency parameters and interactively delivers feedback to the author. It analyses the proper use of acronyms and their definitions, and the use of specialized terminology. It provides Gene Ontology (GO) and Medline Subject Headings (MeSH) categorization of text passages, the retrieval of relevant publications from public scientific literature repositories, and the identification of missing or unused references.

Result: The author receives a summary of findings, the manuscript in its corrected form and a digital abstract containing the GO and MeSH annotations in the NLM/PubMed format.

Availability: http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Rebholz-srv/PaperMaker

Contact: rebholz@ebi.ac.uk