Full text publication rates of papers presented at the British Foot and Ankle Society. Issue 6 (December 2018) - Marsland, Daniel
Highlights: One measure of the scientific value of a meeting is the publication rate of presentations. Previous studies have shown that for Orthopaedic national meetings, the publication rate ranges from 26.6–68.1%. In the current study, a total of 341 papers were presented, with an overall publication rate of 31.7%. Of 251 clinical papers, 200 were case series (79.6%). 68 out of 201 (33.8%) podium presentations and 40 out of 140 (28.6%) poster presentations were published. Overall, 321 abstracts were conducted at units within the UK, in comparison to 20 international abstracts, with publication rates of 30.2% and 55% respectively (p = 0.021). Non-UK based abstracts had a 2.8 times greater likelihood of publication. Arthroscopic surgery had significantly increased publication rates compared with other areas. The rate of publication of basic science papers was significantly greater than clinical papers, with rates of 45.9% and 31.6% respectively, p = 0.004. Basic science papers had 1.84 times greater chance of publication. Abstract: Background: Techniques in foot and ankle surgery have expanded rapidly in recent years, often presented at national society meetings. It is important that research is published to guide evidence based practice. Many abstracts however do not go on to full text publication. Methods: A database was created of all abstracts presented at BOFAS meetings from 2009 to 2013. Computerised searches were performed using PubMed and Google search engines. Results: In total 341 papers were presented, with an overall publication rate of 31.7%. Of 251 clinical papers, 200 were case series (79.6%). Factors associated with publication success included basic science studies, papers related to arthroscopic surgery and research performed outside the UK. Conclusion: A relatively low conversion rate from presentation to publication could be as a result of papers failing to pass the scrutiny of peer review, or that the work is never formally submitted for publication. The information from this study could be used to prioritise future research and promote higher quality research.