What Happens to the Abstracts Presented at the Societè Internationale d'Urologie Meeting?

Urology

Volumn 71, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 367-371

  Autorino, Riccardo ^a   Quarto, Giuseppe ^a   Di Lorenzo, Giuseppe ^a   Giugliano, Francesco ^a   Quattrone, Carmelo ^a   Neri, Fabio ^a   De Domenico, Renato ^b   Sorrentino, Domenico ^b   Mordente, Salvatore ^a   Damiano, Rocco ^b   De Sio, Marco ^a  

^a SECOND UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY MAGNA GRAECIA OF CATANZARO   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; KIDNEY CANCER; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SOCIETY; MEDLINE; NORTH AMERICA; PACIFIC ISLANDS; PEER REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; URINARY DIVERSION; URINE INCONTINENCE; UROLITHIASIS;

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING AS TOPIC; CONGRESSES AS TOPIC; PUBLISHING; UROLOGY;

EID: 40649118437     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2007.11.028     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Scherer R.W., Langenberg P., and von Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 18 (2007) MR000005
2. Ng L., Hersey K., and Fleshner N. Publication rate of abstract presented at the annual meeting of the American Urological Association. BJU Int 94 (2004) 79-81
3. Rao A.R., Beatty J.D., Laniado M., et al. Publication rate of abtstracts presented at the British Association of Urological Surgeons Annual Meeting. BJU Int 97 (2006) 306-309
4. Autorino R., Quarto G., De Sio M., et al. Fate of abstracts presented at the World Congress of Endourology: are they followed by publication in peer-reviewed journals?. J Endourol 20 (2006) 996-1001
5. Hoag C.C., Elterman D.S., and Macneily A.E. Abstracts presented at the American Urological Association Annual Meeting: determinants of subsequent peer reviewed publication. J Urol 176 (2006) 2624-2629
6. Smith W.A., Cancel Q.V., Tseng T.Y., et al. Factors associated with the full publication of studies presented in abstract form at the annual meeting of the American Urological Association. J Urol 177 (2007) 1084-1088
7. Autorino R., Quarto G., Di Lorenzo G., et al. Are abstracts presented at the EAU meeting followed by publication in peer-reviewed journals?. A critical analysis. Eur Urol 51 (2007) 833-840
8. Cartwright R., Khoo A.K., and Cardozo L. Publish or be damned?. The fate of abstracts presented at the International Continence Society Meeting 2003. Neurourol Urodyn 26 (2007) 154-157
9. Weber E.J., Callaham M.L., Wears R.L., et al. Unpublished research form a medical speciality meeting: why investigators fail to publish. JAMA 280 (1988) 257-259
10. Dickersin K., Min Y., and Meinert C.L. Factors influencing publication of research results: follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. JAMA 267 (1992) 374-378
11. Arrivé L., Boelle P.Y., Dono P., et al. Subsequent publication of orally presented original studies within 5 years after 1995 RSNA Scientific Assembly. Radiology 232 (2004) 101-106
12. Timmer A., Hilsden R.J., Cole J., et al. Publication bias in gastroenterological research: a retrospective cohort study based on abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting. BMC Med Res Methodol 2 (2002) 7-17
13. Partin A.W. Letter from the Editor. Urology 65 (2005) 1
14. Scherer R.W., Dickersin K., and Langerberg P. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts: a meta-analysis. JAMA 272 (1994) 158-162
15. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. JAMA 277 (1997) 927-934
16. Callaham M.L., Wears R.L., Weber E.J., et al. Positive-outcome bias and other limitations in the outcome of research abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting. JAMA 280 (1998) 254-257
17. Thornton A., and Lee P. Publication bias in meta-analysis: its causes and consequences. J Clin Epidemiol 53 (2000) 207-216
18. Toma M., McAlister F.A., Bialy L., et al. Transition from meeting abstract to full-length journal article for randomized controlled trials. JAMA 295 (2006) 1281-1287
19. Berry E., Kelly S., Hutton J., et al. Identifying studies for systematic reviews: an example from medical imaging. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 16 (2000) 668-672
20. Guller U., and DeLong E.R. Interpreting statistics in medical literature: a vademecum for surgeons. J Am Coll Surg 198 (2004) 441-458
21. Timmer A., Sutherland L.R., and Hilsden R.J. Development and evaluation of a quality score for abstracts. BMC Med Res Methodol 3 (2003) 2-8
22. Eloubeidi M.A., Wade S.B., and Provenzale D. Factors associated with acceptance and full publication of GI endoscopic research originally published in abstract form. Gastrointest Endosc 53 (2001) 275-282