Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24764710›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2014

Publication rates of abstracts presented at the 2007 and 2010 Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology meetings.

A Meissner, G Delouya, D Marcovitch, D Donath, D Taussky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Factors associated with the publication and impact of CUA abstracts over the last decade.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025
    Article
  3. Publication rates of the abstracts presented at the annual meeting of International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2018
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

A MeissnerDépartement de Radio-Oncologie, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Hôpital Notre-Dame, Montreal, QC.
G DelouyaDépartement de Radio-Oncologie, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Hôpital Notre-Dame, Montreal, QC.
D MarcovitchDépartement de Radio-Oncologie, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Hôpital Notre-Dame, Montreal, QC.
D DonathDépartement de Radio-Oncologie, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Hôpital Notre-Dame, Montreal, QC.
D TausskyDépartement de Radio-Oncologie, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Hôpital Notre-Dame, Montreal, QC.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe set out to determine the rate, time-trend, and defining factors associated with publication of abstracts presented at two annual scientific meetings of the Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology (caro).

methodsAll abstracts accepted for oral presentation in 2007 and 2010 were obtained from the caro program archives and searched using the PubMed database. Variables in the dataset included the year of presentation at caro and of publication in a scientific journal, time to publication (in months), publishing journal, impact factor of publishing journal, abstract research type (clinical, technical, or basic science) and disease site, country of origin, and university of the first author.

resultsOverall, 88 of 172 abstracts from the 2007 (n = 102) and 2010 (n = 70) caro meetings were published in peer-reviewed journals (publication rate: 51.2%). Mean time to publication was 18.5 months. Among research types, clinical research (62.5%) and, among disease sites, prostate cancer (40.4%) were most likely to be published. Of all the abstracts, 50.1% were contributed by only 2 universities, a proportion that resembles the overall abstract publication rate of 51.2%. The conversion rate for those 2 universities (51.1%) is very similar to that for all abstracts presented at the two meetings.

conclusionsHalf the abstracts presented at the 2007 and 2010 caro meetings were ultimately published in journals indexed in PubMed by about 1.5 years after presentation. Half the abstracts and publications came from just 2 universities; more must to be done to close the gap.

Indexed as

Abstractsannual meetingsCanadaconversion rateradiation oncology

Identifiers

PMID24764710
PMCPMC3997458

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.