Context. - It is not known whether peer review of research abstracts submitted to scientific meetings influences subsequent attempts at publication.

Objective

- 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.

Design and Participants

- 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In 1996, authors of 266 unpublished studies were asked to complete questionnaires.

Main Outcome Measures

- 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.

Results

- A total of 223 (84%) of the unpublished investigators returned the questionnaire.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). (...)