ArticleIndian journal of pediatrics2015
Publication rate of scientific papers presented at the XXVI Annual Convention of National Neonatology Forum (NEOCON 2006).
Article in Indian journal of pediatrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Abstract to publication conversion in pediatric critical care medicine in Pakistan.Acute and critical care · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo document the publication rate of papers presented at the Annual Convention of National Neonatology Forum of India (NNF), and study the factors associated with their subsequent publication.
methodsAll papers presented at the NEOCON 2006, the XXVI annual convention of NNF at Varanasi, India, were searched for subsequent full publication, by an internet-based search using Pubmed, Google Scholar and Indmed. Publication of the presented paper was looked for in English language, peer-reviewed, indexed journals over the next five years (1st January 2007 to 31st December, 2011). The full published papers were compared with the abstract and differences noted.
resultsOne hundred and two papers and posters were presented at the conference and 14 (13.7 %) of these were published in the next five years. None was published in any un-indexed journal. The highest percentage of paper publication was from the Award paper category (83.3 %) and least from Innovation category (none). The only factor significantly associated with subsequent publication was presentation as an Award paper (P < 0.001). On comparison of the presented abstracts and the published papers, there was a change in authors in 78.5 %, title in 42.8 %, and the data in 35.7 %.
conclusionsThe subsequent publication of conference abstracts as a full-paper is sub-optimal in the field of neonatology. Further research is needed to identify the factors responsible for the poor subsequent publication, and efforts need to be made to address them both at the institutional and the researchers' level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25005939What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.