These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Outcome of abstracts presented at the British Association of Paediatric Surgeons congresses (1999-2008).
    Author: Macdonald AL, Parsons C, Davenport M.
    Journal: J Pediatr Surg; 2012 Feb; 47(2):386-90. PubMed ID: 22325397.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Abstracts presented at the British Association of Paediatric Surgeons annual congress have the potential to influence practice. However, it is not known what percentage of accepted abstracts actually go on to withstand peer review and be published in the literature. METHODS: Abstract books were reviewed for the period 1999 to 2008. A MEDLINE search using keywords from title and authors' names was used to identify subsequent publication. Categorical analysis for variation and trend with P < .05 was accepted as significant. Data were expressed as median (interquartile range). RESULTS: During the 10-year period, 862 abstracts were presented orally and were derived from 36 countries, with a median of 18 (17-19) countries represented each year. Of these, 375 (43%) abstracts originated from 25 United Kingdom (UK) institutions with most (45%) from London and specifically the Institute of Child Health/Great Ormond Street Hospital (n = 118, 14%). The annual median number of presentations was 81 (74-97). This fell during the first half of the decade but is now rising with a significant increase in the UK proportion (P = .001). Thirty (27-35) abstracts per year (overall, n = 302) were subsequently published with the proportion (36% [33%-39%]) remaining remarkably consistent over the period. Abstracts were published in a range of 26 journals, but most (69%) were published in the Journal of Pediatric Surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The publication rate of the British Association of Paediatric Surgeons congress and hence entry into the "evidence base" as published material is consistent at just over one third of submissions. Whether this represents a waste of scientific endeavor or further refinement of quality is a moot point.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]