Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 May-Jun;56(3):189-95.
doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.40356.

An observational study of the proceedings of the All India Ophthalmological Conference, 2000 and subsequent publication in indexed journals

Upreet Dhaliwal  1 , Rajeev Kumar
Affiliations

An observational study of the proceedings of the All India Ophthalmological Conference, 2000 and subsequent publication in indexed journals

Upreet Dhaliwal et al. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2008 May-Jun.

Abstract

Aims: To determine the quality of reporting in the proceedings of the All India Ophthalmological Conference (AIOC) 2000, subsequent rate of publication in an indexed journal and differences between the proceedings and the journal version of these papers.

Design: Observational study.

Materials and methods: All papers presented at the AIOC 2000 were retrieved from the proceedings and assessed for completeness of reporting. To determine the subsequent full publication, a Medline search was performed as of January 2007; consistency between the proceedings paper and the final publication was evaluated.

Statistical analysis: Chi square and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare publication rates based on geographical location, subspecialty and study design; Student's t -test was used to compare differences based on the number of authors and sample size.

Results: Two hundred papers were retrieved; many failed to include study dates, design or statistical methods employed. Thirty-three (16.5%) papers were subsequently published in indexed journals by January 2007. The published version differed from the proceedings paper in 27 (81.8%) instances, mostly relating to changes in author name, number or sequence.

Conclusions: The overall quality of reporting of scientific papers in the proceedings of the AIOC 2000 was inadequate and many did not result in publication in an indexed journal. Differences between the published paper in journals and in proceedings were seen in several instances. Ophthalmologists should be cautious about using the information provided in conference proceedings in their ophthalmic practice.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • AIOS proceedings: a response.
    Rajendran B. Rajendran B. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2009 Jan-Feb;57(1):77-8. doi: 10.4103/0301-4738.44511. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2009. PMID: 19075425 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. Secil M, Ucar G, Denturk C, Karasu D, Dicle O. Publication rates of scientific presentations in Turkish national radiology congresses. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2005;11:69–73. - PubMed
    1. Marx WF, Cloft HJ, Do HM, Kallmes DF. The fate of neuroradiologic abstracts presented at national meetings in 1993: Rate of subsequent publication in peer-reviewed, indexed journals. Am J Neuroradiol. 1999;20:1173–7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. von Elm E, Costanza MC, Walder B, Tramer MR. More insights into the fate of biomedical meeting abstracts: A systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:12. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Soffer A. Beware the 200-word abstract. Arch Intern Med. 1976;136:1232–3. - PubMed
    1. Rubin HR, Redelmeier DA, Wu AW, Steinberg EP. How reliable is peer review of scientific abstracts? Looking back at the annual meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine. J Gen Intern Med. 1993;8:255–8. - PubMed

MeSH terms