Barriers to peer-reviewed journal article publication of abstracts presented at the 2006-2008 Association of Chiropractic Colleges Educational Conference and Research Agenda Conference Meetings

Abstract

Objective: We investigated the self-reported barriers to publication for authors of abstracts presented at the most recent chiropractic scientific meetings for which publication rates are known, that is the 2006 to 2008 Association of Chiropractic Colleges Educational Conference and Research Agenda Conference (ACC/RAC) meetings.

Methods: A 4-question electronic survey was sent via email to 1 of the listed authors for each abstract not published as a full paper within 4 years of the 2006 to 2008 ACC/RAC meetings. Each author was asked to complete the survey for only 1 abstract. Taking into account authors who appeared on more than 1 abstract, a link to the electronic survey was emailed to 111 potential participants.

Results: Of 111 participants, 67 completed a survey for a return rate of 60%. Over 80% (55/67) of the respondents were chiropractors who were faculty members at educational institutions. Of the subjects, 30% (20/67) indicated that the meeting abstract had either been published after 2012 or still was in the publishing process. For those who had not submitted a manuscript for publication, the most frequently cited barriers to publishing were pursuit of publishing as a low priority followed by a lack of time to prepare a manuscript.

Conclusion: The main barriers to publishing in this sample were that publishing had a low priority compared to other possible uses of the abstract author's time and a perceived lack of time to pursue the publication process.

Keywords: Chiropractic; Congresses (Publication Type); Journal Article (Publication Type); Publication Formats (Publication Type).

Figure 1.

Survey tool with consent verbiage for 2008 meeting abstracts. The year was changed in the survey tools for 2006 and 2007 meeting abstracts.

Figure 2.

Academic background of authors responding to surveys.

Figure 3.

Professional situation/occupation of survey respondents.

Figure 4.

Status of abstract with regard to publication.

Figure 5.

Barriers to publication. Time: not enough time to prepare the paper for manuscript. Priority: pursuit of publication was a low priority. Preliminary: presentation was preliminary work for a larger ongoing study. Co-author: difficulty with co-authors. Another: responsibility of writing the manuscript belonged to someone else. Methods: a low likelihood that a journal would accept it for publication because of methodological limitations of the work. No release: no release time was granted to work on the manuscript. Case study: the presentation was a case study and rules of the group supporting the study forbid publication of case studies. Diff version: a different version of the data were published. Similar: other studies with similar findings were already published. Unimportant: the results were not important enough. Negative stats: the statistical analysis was not positive. Plan to submit: plan to submit for publication.