An American and Brazilian Perspective on Abstracts Presented in Coloproctology Conferences Converted into Published Manuscripts

Q4 Medicine Journal of Coloproctology Pub Date : 2023-01-04 DOI:10.1055/s-0043-1769917
Hugo Samartine, Lauro Igor Silva, Lucas Rosasco Mazzini, Daniel Ferreira Paiva, Giovanna Bertazzola Gracitelli, J. Aquino, E. D. T. Mendes
{"title":"An American and Brazilian Perspective on Abstracts Presented in Coloproctology Conferences Converted into Published Manuscripts","authors":"Hugo Samartine, Lauro Igor Silva, Lucas Rosasco Mazzini, Daniel Ferreira Paiva, Giovanna Bertazzola Gracitelli, J. Aquino, E. D. T. Mendes","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1769917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introduction  The presentation of abstracts in a congress is an important step for the dissemination of scientific information. The American Congress of Coloproctology is promoted by the American Society of Colon & Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), and it is the largest in number of participants within the specialty, followed by the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology. The present study aims to evaluate variables related to the quality of the scientific production of the abstracts presented in these two events and their conversion rate to published manuscripts. Materials and Methods  The present bibliometric study assesses secondary data from the review of abstracts presented in these 2 important conferences in 2016, followed by a research of the publications from these congress presentations. Results  The total number of abstracts evaluated was 854. The rate of articles containing statistical analyses was of 73.7% in the American congress, and of 34.1% in the Brazilian congress. Multicentric studies were more prevalent in the American congress (23.1%). Regarding study design, the most common were case reports in the Brazilian (44.8%) congress and retrospective studies in the American congress (67.7%). As for the works presented, the rate of conversion into full manuscripts in the American congress was of 24.2% compared with 10.6% in the Brazilian congress. Most papers from the American congress (93.7%) have citations compared with 68.6% of the other event evaluated. Conclusion  The scientific performance demonstrated by the conversion rate of abstracts into publications is below ideal, mainly in relation to the Brazilian meeting; yet, there were significant differences between the two events in terms of the profile of the presentations and several variables analyzed.","PeriodicalId":15408,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Coloproctology","volume":"43 1","pages":"110 - 116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1769917","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Introduction  The presentation of abstracts in a congress is an important step for the dissemination of scientific information. The American Congress of Coloproctology is promoted by the American Society of Colon & Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS), and it is the largest in number of participants within the specialty, followed by the Brazilian Congress of Coloproctology. The present study aims to evaluate variables related to the quality of the scientific production of the abstracts presented in these two events and their conversion rate to published manuscripts. Materials and Methods  The present bibliometric study assesses secondary data from the review of abstracts presented in these 2 important conferences in 2016, followed by a research of the publications from these congress presentations. Results  The total number of abstracts evaluated was 854. The rate of articles containing statistical analyses was of 73.7% in the American congress, and of 34.1% in the Brazilian congress. Multicentric studies were more prevalent in the American congress (23.1%). Regarding study design, the most common were case reports in the Brazilian (44.8%) congress and retrospective studies in the American congress (67.7%). As for the works presented, the rate of conversion into full manuscripts in the American congress was of 24.2% compared with 10.6% in the Brazilian congress. Most papers from the American congress (93.7%) have citations compared with 68.6% of the other event evaluated. Conclusion  The scientific performance demonstrated by the conversion rate of abstracts into publications is below ideal, mainly in relation to the Brazilian meeting; yet, there were significant differences between the two events in terms of the profile of the presentations and several variables analyzed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国和巴西对肠系学会议摘要转化为发表稿件的看法
摘要介绍会议摘要的展示是科学信息传播的重要环节。美国结肠直肠外科大会是由美国结肠直肠外科医生协会(ASCRS)推动的,它是该专业参与者人数最多的会议,其次是巴西结肠直肠外科大会。本研究旨在评估与这两个事件中提出的摘要的科学生产质量及其对已发表手稿的转化率有关的变量。材料和方法本文献计量学研究评估了2016年这两个重要会议发表的摘要的二手数据,然后对这些会议发表的出版物进行了研究。结果共评价论文854篇。美国国会的统计分析文章占73.7%,巴西国会的统计分析文章占34.1%。多中心研究在美国国会更为普遍(23.1%)。在研究设计方面,最常见的是巴西国会的病例报告(44.8%)和美国国会的回顾性研究(67.7%)。在提交的作品中,美国国会转化为全文的比例为24.2%,巴西国会为10.6%。大多数来自美国国会的论文(93.7%)被引用,而其他事件的被引用率为68.6%。结论摘要转化为出版物的转化率所体现的科学绩效低于理想水平,主要与巴西会议有关;然而,就演讲的概况和分析的几个变量而言,这两个事件之间存在显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Coloproctology
Journal of Coloproctology Medicine-Gastroenterology
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
47 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of Salvia officinalis in the Treatment of Acetic Acid-Induced Ulcerative Colitis in a Rat Model Unusual Case of Colonic Intussusception Caused by Angiolipoma: Case Report and Literature Review Vegetating Lesions that Appear in the Scar after Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Tumors: Tumor Regrowth or Benign Neoplasm? Retrospective Study of Patients Submitted to Appendectomy in a Tertiary Hospital: Is There a Difference between the Public and Supplementary Health System? Pilonidal Sinus of the Anal Canal: A Rare Entity - Case Report
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1