Biomedical conferences’ author instructions rarely mention guidelines for reporting abstracts of trials and systematic reviews
Publication: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Abstract
Aim: To analyze whether instructions for authors of biomedical conference abstracts mention guidelines for writing randomized controlled trial and systematic review abstracts and to evaluate reasons for their absence from instructions. Materials & methods: We analyzed instructions for authors of biomedical conferences advertized in 2019 and assessed whether they mentioned Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Abstracts and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for Abstracts guidelines. We surveyed contact persons from abstract/publication committees of selected conferences to analyze why relevant guidelines were missing. Results: Instructions for abstracts were available for 819 conferences. Only two (0.2%) had reporting instructions for randomized controlled trial/systematic review authors. Almost half of the contacted conference organizers whose response we received were not aware of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Abstracts and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials for Abstracts guidelines. Conclusion: Conference organizers do not require and are not familiar enough with reporting guidelines.
Supplementary Material
File (suppl_file.docx)
- Download
- 14.28 KB
References
1.
Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D et al. CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 5(1), e20 (2008).
2.
Beller EM, Glasziou PP, Altman DG et al. PRISMA for abstracts: reporting systematic reviews in journal and conference abstracts. PLoS Med. 10(4), e1001419 (2013).
3.
Can OS, Yilmaz AA, Hasdogan M et al. Has the quality of abstracts for randomised controlled trials improved since the release of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trial guideline for abstract reporting? A survey of four high-profile anaesthesia journals. Eur. J. Anaesthesiol. 28(7), 485–492 (2011).
4.
Shin WJ, Kim YO, Oh JH, Chung JS, Kim KH. Is there any quality improvement in the randomized controlled trial abstracts in the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology after the publication of the CONSORT abstract guidelines in 2008? Korean J. Anesthesiol. 68(4), 420–422 (2015).
5.
Klassen TP, Wiebe N, Russell K et al. Abstracts of randomized controlled trials presented at the society for pediatric research meeting – an example of publication bias. Arch. Pediatr. Adolesc. Med. 156(5), 474–479 (2002).
6.
Cui Q, Tian J, Song X, Yang K. Does the CONSORT checklist for abstracts improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials on clinical pathways? J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 20(6), 827–833 (2014).
7.
Ghimire S, Kyung E, Kang W, Kim E. Assessment of adherence to the CONSORT statement for quality of reports on randomized controlled trial abstracts from four high-impact general medical journals. Trials 13, 77 (2012).
8.
Rice DB, Kloda LA, Shrier I, Thombs BD. Reporting quality in abstracts of meta-analyses of depression screening tool accuracy: a review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. BMJ Open 6(11), e012867 (2016).
9.
Kazerani M, Davoudian A, Zayeri F, Soori H. Assessing abstracts of Iranian systematic reviews and meta-analysis indexed in WOS and Scopus using PRISMA. Med. J. Islam. Repub. Iran 31, 18 (2017).
10.
Faggion CM Jr, Liu J, Huda F, Atieh M. Assessment of the quality of reporting in abstracts of systematic reviews with meta-analyses in periodontology and implant dentistry. J. Periodontal Res. 49(2), 137–142 (2014).
11.
Bigna JJ, Um LN, Nansseu JR. A comparison of quality of abstracts of systematic reviews including meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in high-impact general medicine journals before and after the publication of PRISMA extension for abstracts: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst. Rev. 5(1), 174 (2016).
12.
Hopewell S, Boutron I, Altman DG, Ravaud P. Deficiencies in the publication and reporting of the results of systematic reviews presented at scientific medical conferences. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 68(12), 1488–1495 (2015).
13.
Sims MT, Henning NM, Wayant CC, Vassar M. Do emergency medicine journals promote trial registration and adherence to reporting guidelines? A survey of “Instructions for Authors”. Scand. J. Trauma Resusc. Emerg. Med. 24(1), 137 (2016).
14.
Checketts JX, Sims MT, Detweiler B, Middlemist K, Jones J, Vassar M. An Evaluation of Reporting Guidelines and Clinical Trial Registry Requirements Among Orthopaedic Surgery Journals. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 100(3), e15 (2018).
15.
Toews I, Binder N, Wolff RF, Toprak G, Von Elm E, Meerpohl JJ. Guidance in author instructions of hematology and oncology journals: a cross sectional and longitudinal study. PLoS ONE 12(4), e0176489 (2017).
16.
Springer Nature (2020). https://www.nature.com/natureevents/science
17.
eMedEvents (2020). https://www.emedevents.com/medical-conferences/
18.
19.
Hua F, Deng L, Kau CH, Jiang H, He H, Walsh T. Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts: survey of leading general dental journals. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 146(9), 669–678 e661 (2015).
20.
Pussegoda K, Turner L, Garritty C et al. Systematic review adherence to methodological or reporting quality. Syst. Rev. 6(1), 131 (2017).
21.
Agha RA, Camm CF, Doganay E, Edison E, Siddiqui MR, Orgill DP. Randomised controlled trials in plastic surgery: a systematic review of reporting quality. Eur. J. Plast. Surg. 37, 55–62 (2014).
22.
Janackovic K, Puljak L. Reporting quality of randomized controlled trial abstracts in the seven highest-ranking anesthesiology journals. Trials 19(1), 591 (2018).
23.
Chow JTY, Turkstra TP, Yim E, Jones PM. The degree of adherence to CONSORT reporting guidelines for the abstracts of randomised clinical trials published in anaesthesia journals: a cross-sectional study of reporting adherence in 2010 and 2016. Eur. J. Anaesthesiol. 35(12), 942–948 (2018).
24.
Agha RA, Fowler AJ, Limb C et al. Impact of the mandatory implementation of reporting guidelines on reporting quality in a surgical journal: a before and after study. Int. J. Surg. 30, 169–172 (2016).
25.
Turner L, Shamseer L, Altman DG et al. Consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) and the completeness of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in medical journals. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 11, MR000030 (2012).
26.
Blanco D, Altman D, Moher D, Boutron I, Kirkham JJ, Cobo E. Scoping review on interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research. BMJ Open 9(5), e026589 (2019).
27.
Sriganesh K, Bharadwaj S, Wang M et al. Quality of abstracts of randomized control trials in five top pain journals: a systematic survey. Contemp. Clin. Trials Commun. 7, 64–68 (2017).
28.
Saric L, Vucic K, Dragicevic K et al. Comparison of conference abstracts and full-text publications of randomized controlled trials presented at four consecutive World Congresses of Pain: reporting quality and agreement of results. Eur. J. Pain 23(1), 107–116 (2019).
29.
Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann. Intern. Med. 126(5), 376–380 (1997).
30.
Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann. Intern. Med. 162(11), 777–784 (2015).
31.
Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Sinclair JC, Hayward R, Cook DJ, Cook RJ. Users' guides to the medical literature. IX. A method for grading health care recommendations. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 274(22), 1800–1804 (1995).
32.
Collaborative Approach to Meta-Analysis and Review of Animal Data from Experimental Studies. CAMARADES (2014). http://www.dcn.ed.ac.uk/camarades/default.htm
33.
Saric L, Dosenovic S, Saldanha IJ, Kadic AJ, Puljak L. Conference abstracts describing systematic reviews on pain were selectively published, not reliable, and poorly reported. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 117, 1–8 (2019).
34.
Hua F, Sun Q, Zhao T, Chen X, He H. Reporting quality of randomised controlled trial abstracts presented at the SLEEP annual meetings: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 9(7), e029270 (2019).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Pages: 83 - 91
PubMed: 31950848
Copyright
© 2020 Future Medicine Ltd.
History
Received: 28 October 2019
Accepted: 4 December 2019
Published online: 17 January 2020
Keywords:
Topics
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Article Usage
Article usage data only available from February 2023. Historical article usage data, showing the number of article downloads, is available upon request.
Citations
How to Cite
Biomedical conferences’ author instructions rarely mention guidelines for reporting abstracts of trials and systematic reviews. (2020) Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. DOI: 10.2217/cer-2019-0158
Export citation
Select the citation format you wish to export for this article or chapter.
Citing Literature
- Daniel Rehlicki, Mia Plenkovic, Ljerka Delac, Dawid Pieper, Ana Marušić, Livia Puljak, Author instructions in biomedical journals infrequently address systematic review reporting and methodology: a cross-sectional study, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.11.008, 166, (111218), (2024).
- Samantha Hackenbroich, Peter Kranke, Patrick Meybohm, Stephanie Weibel, Include or not to include conference abstracts in systematic reviews? Lessons learned from a large Cochrane network meta-analysis including 585 trials, Systematic Reviews, 10.1186/s13643-022-02048-6, 11, 1, (2022).
- Darko Novak, Livia Puljak, Frequency and characteristics of promissory conference abstracts, i.e. abstracts without results, accepted at Cochrane Colloquia 1994-2020, BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10.1186/s12874-021-01442-3, 21, 1, (2021).