Analysis of Abstracts Presented at the Prosthodontic Research Section of IADR General Sessions 2004-2005: Demographics, Publication Rates, and Factors Contributing to Publication

Purpose: The purposes of this study were to describe the demographics of abstracts presented at the prosthodontics section of IADR General Sessions from 2004 to 2005, evaluate the publication rate of abstracts, and analyze the relationship between variables in abstracts and publication.Materials and Methods: Prosthodontics research section abstracts from the IADR General Session in 2004 and 2005 were evaluated for: number of authors, presentation type, origin, affiliation, topic, study design, statistics, study outcome, and funding. The publication rate was calculated following a PubMed search. The journal of publication, year of publication, and the length of time before publication were analyzed. Descriptive statistics were used for the data analysis; the relationships between presentation type, study design, study outcome, statistics, funding, and publication were analyzed using logistic regression (alpha = 0.05).Results: From 346 abstracts, 37.0% were published. For oral presentations, 40.7% were published; 35.8% of poster presentations were published. The mean duration before publicationwas 26.4months. North America had themost abstracts, and Europe had the most publications. Fixed prosthodontic research had the highest number and proportion for publication. A significant association with publication was noted for neutral study outcomes (p = 0.018), studies with funding (p = 0.035), and abstracts from Europe (p = 0.001).Conclusions: The majority of abstracts from the prosthodontics research section of IADR General Sessions from 2004 and 2005 remain unpublished. A significant association for publication was noted with neutral outcomes, funding, and abstracts from Europe.

Factors Influencing Publication Rates of Abstracts Presented at the ADEA Annual Session & Exhibition

Factors related to the path of abstracts from presentation at a conference to publication as a full article have been analyzed in the medical field, but only a few studies have been performed in dentistry. This study investigated the rate of publication of articles based on abstracts presented at the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) Annual Session & Exhibition in 2002 and 2003 and the time lag to publication. This study also aimed to characterize the abstracts and subsequent articles and determine if there were any significant factors related to expansion of an abstract into a full manuscript. A total of 370 abstracts met the inclusion criteria and were examined for this study. Subsequent published articles were located using a standard PubMed search. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were used to analyze the data collected (alpha=0.05). Results suggest that there was a low (19 percent) publication rate for articles based on abstracts presented at the meetings studied. The median time between abstract presentation and article publication was ten months. Factors that showed significant correlation to likelihood of article publication were multiple affiliations, presence of analytical statistics, and, to a lesser extent, funding. We suggest that presenters at these meetings should expand their abstracts into full manuscripts and seek to publish them in peer-reviewed journals for the benefit of the profession.

Differences between ADEA annual session poster abstracts and their corresponding full published articles

The purpose of this study was to investigate differences between abstracts of posters presented at the 79th (2002) and 80th (2003) Annual Session & Exhibition of the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) and the published full-length articles resulting from the same studies. The abstracts for poster presentation sessions were downloaded, and basic characteristics of the abstracts and their authors were determined. A PubMed search was then performed to identify the publication of full-length articles based on those abstracts in a peer-reviewed journal. The differences between the abstract and the article were examined and categorized as major and minor differences. Differences identified included authorship, title, materials and methods, results, conclusions, and funding. Data were analyzed with both descriptive and analytic statistics. Overall, 89 percent of the abstracts had at least one variation from its corresponding article, and 65 percent and 76 percent of the abstracts had at least one major and minor variation, respectively, from its corresponding article. The most prevalent major variation was in study results, and the most prevalent minor variation was change in the number of authors. The discussion speculates on some possible reasons for these differences.

Discrepancies between abstracts presented at international association for dental research annual sessions from 2004 to 2005 and full-text publication

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the discrepancies between abstracts presented at the IADR meeting (2004-2005) and their full-text publication. Material and Methods. Abstracts from the Prosthodontic Section of IADR meeting were obtained. The following information was collected: abstract title, number of authors, study design, statistical analysis, outcome, and funding source. PubMed was used to identify the full-text publication of the abstracts. The discrepancies between the abstract and the full-text publication were examined, categorized as major and minor discrepancies, and quantified. The data were collected and analyzed using descriptive analysis. Frequency and percentage of major and minor discrepancies were calculated. Results. A total of 109 (95.6%) articles showed changes from their abstracts. Seventy-four (65.0%) and 105 (92.0%) publications had at least one major and one minor discrepancies, respectively. Minor discrepancies were more prevalent (92.0%) than major discrepancies (65.0%). The most common minor discrepancy was observed in the title (80.7%), and most common major discrepancies were seen in results (48.2%). Conclusion. Minor discrepancies were more prevalent than major discrepancies. The data presented in this study may be useful to establish a more comprehensive structured abstract requirement for future meetings. © 2012 Soni Prasad et al.

Um roteiro para a escrita de abstracts de artigos de pesquisa: estrutura retórica e técnicas de argumentação

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Identificação de categorias retóricas sentenciais em abstracts de Química

Abstracts of scientific articles offer the first contact their readers have with the issues and results presented by the article, thus having a pivotal screening role. Due to their importance, they need to be well written, taking into account their genre-specific rules. Several studies have aimed at describing its particular textual structure, its rubric, though there is still much data to be amassed. The purpose of this work was to analyze a corpus of Chemistry abstracts, seeking the rhetoric categories that structure them in the sentence level and to describe its rubric. In order to do that, we have used lexical and grammatical evidence to categorise the rhetoric role each sentence has. We have found that the expected structure occurs, the main rhetoric focus being the presentation of results in the vast majority of cases. Furthermore, the occurrence of certain categories may depend on the size of the abstract, and certain rhetoric roles are embedded in others, especially the one describing method. The corpus has yet to be expanded to offer further results, two of them being to help non-native writers to better structure the textual level of their works and to build a software of automatic analysis of abstracts