4.3 Article

Fate of abstracts from American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery Annual Meetings

期刊

JOURNAL OF COSMETIC DERMATOLOGY
卷 20, 期 8, 页码 2493-2497

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jocd.13862

关键词

abstracts; American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery; annual meeting; publication frequency; publication latency; publication outcomes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigated the publication rates, latency to publication, and journals of abstracts presented at ASLMS meetings in 2013, 2014, and 2015. Results showed publication rates ranging from 43.5% to 50.3% and an average latency of 16.1 months, indicating potential factors contributing to publication outcomes.
Objectives The American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery (ASLMS) Annual Meeting provides a unique platform for the dissemination of research in laser and energy-based technologies, which are regularly utilized in cosmetic dermatology. We sought to elucidate the fate of the abstracts presented at ASLMS meetings over 3 years. Methods We conducted a literature search for all abstracts presented at ASLMS meetings in 2013, 2014, and 2015 to determine publication rate, latency to publication, and journals of publication. Results The publication rate of abstracts presented at the 2013, 2014, and 2015 ASLMS meetings was 50.3%, 49.1%, and 43.5%, respectively. Average latency to publication was 16.1 months across these three years. Publication outcomes differed across general discipline, abstract type, poster category, clinical focus, and study design. Conclusion Our findings provide insight into the likelihood of publication, as well as potential contributing factors, for abstracts presented at ASLMS. With about half of all abstracts reaching publication, our study highlights the significant volume of research presented at this unique meeting that does not reach a broader audience through publication and thus is limited in its potential clinical applications in cosmetic dermatology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据