Reverse adoption of information and communication technology among organisers of academic conferences.

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Scientometrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

Medical conferences: Limitation or liberal escalation.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India
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

2 authors.

Martin Thomas FalkDepartment of Business and IT, School of Business, University of South-Eastern Norway, Campus Bø, Gullbringvegen 36, 3800 Bø, Norway.ORCID 0000-0003-0518-6513

Eva HagstenDepartment of Business and IT, School of Business, University of South-Eastern Norway, Campus Bø, Gullbringvegen 36, 3800 Bø, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7091-1449

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examines the formats offered for academic conferences in the mature stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Two out of three organisers discontinue their usage of online video tools and focus on in-person conferences. Only one out of five conferences offers hybrid solutions and even fewer a virtual alternative (13%). Data for the analysis originate from 547 calls for proposals announced in Spring 2022 for conferences to be held during the period August 2022 to July 2023. Estimates using a multinomial logit model show that the planning time is significantly related to the choice of format offered. The longer the lead time, the more likely it is to offer an in-person conference. International travel restrictions and bans on gatherings for the location of the venue at the time of planning are significantly related to the choice of virtual, but not hybrid formats. There are also large differences in the choice across disciplines, with conferences in arts and humanities as well as natural sciences showing the lowest preference for the virtual format.

Indexed as

Academic conferencesHybrid conferencesMultinomial logit modelPlanning horizonTravel restrictionsVirtual conferences

Identifiers

PMID36844385

DOI10.1007/s11192-022-04616-y

PMCPMC9939029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

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.