International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. Prague, CZE, 1997/09.
Context. - It is not known whether peer review of research abstracts submitted to scientific meetings influences subsequent attempts at publication.
- To determine why research submitted to a scientific meeting is not subsequently published.
We hypothesized that authors of abstracts rejected by a meeting are less likely to pursue publication than those whose abstracts are accepted, regardless of research quality.
- Blinded review of abstracts submitted to a medical specialty meeting in 1991 and not published as full manuscripts within 5 years.
In 1996, authors of 266 unpublished studies were asked to complete questionnaires.
- Submission of a full manuscript to a joumal between 1991 and 1996 ; failure to submit a manuscript to a journal because the investigator believed it would not be accepted for publication.
- A total of 223 (84%) of the unpublished investigators returned the questionnaire.
Only 44 (20%) had submitted manuscripts to a joumal.
Manuscript submission was not associated with abstract quality (odds ratio [OR], 1.16 ; 95% confidence interval [Cl], 0.80-1.64), positive results (OR, 0.75 ; 95% Cl, 0.31-1.57), or other study characteristics.
Having an abstract accepted for presentation at the meeting weakly predicted submission of a manuscript to a journal (OR, 1.88 ; 95% Cl, 0.84-4.10). (...)
Mots-clés Pascal : Article, Médecine, Rejet, Document publié, Recherche scientifique, Congrès, Exploration, Pronostic, Homme, Littérature scientifique, Publication future
Mots-clés Pascal anglais : Article, Medicine, Rejection, Published document, Scientific research, Congress, Exploration, Prognosis, Human, Scientific literature
Notice produite par :
Inist-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique
Cote : 98-0445272
Code Inist : 002B30A09. Création : 25/01/1999.