Contribution of national congress presentations to scientific literature: An analysis of efficiency

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the publication rates (PRs) of presentations given at the 9th Turkish Emergency Medicine Congress (9th TEMC) and 9th National Emergency Medicine Congress (9th NEMC) in peer-reviewed journals in the subsequent 4 years.

Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study used PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases to examine retrospectively the publication of oral and poster presentations given at the 9th TEMC and 9th NEMC in peer-reviewed journals.

Results: A total of 1428 presentations were examined. Of these, 226 (15.8%) were published in peer-reviewed journals. Of the presentations, 114 (50.4%) were published in the first year. The median and inter-quartile range for the duration of publication of all presentations were 12 months and 14 months, respectively. The PR of oral presentations (31.7%) was higher than that of poster presentations (13.3%) (Odds ratio= 3.03, 95% CI=2.15–4.20, P < 0.001). Publication success was found to be high in original studies, but significantly low in case reports. The PR of university-sourced studies in foreign journals was higher compared with other institutions (P=0.002). Of the presentations published, 135 (59.7%) and 17 (7.5%) had minor and major inconsistencies, respectively. A significant relationship was found between the presence of inconsistency in the presentations and their publications, and their duration of publication (Hazard ratio= 0.69, 95% confidence interval=0.53–0.90, P < 0.001).

Conclusion: The PRs found in this study were quite low compared with the international EM congresses, and they were similar to the PRs of presentations given at national congresses held by other specialty branches. The high number of case reports in the present study was thought to be one of the reasons for a decrease in PRs. The authors should be encouraged to conduct scientific studies instead of collecting cases.