Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 59, Issue 7 , Pages 681-684 , July 2006

Reporting of trials presented in conference abstracts needs to be improved

  • Sally Hopewell

      Affiliations

    • UK Cochrane Centre, Summertown Pavilion, Middle Way, Oxford, OX2 7LB, United Kingdom
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +44 1865 516300; fax: +44 1865 516311.
    • ,
  • Mike Clarke

      Affiliations

    • UK Cochrane Centre, Summertown Pavilion, Middle Way, Oxford, OX2 7LB, United Kingdom
    • ,
  • Lisa Askie

      Affiliations

    • Centre for Perinatal Health Services Research, Building DO2, Blackburn Circuit, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia

,Accepted 28 September 2005.

References 

  1. Scherer RW, Langenberg P. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts (Cochrane Methodology Review). In: The Cochrane library. Issue 1. Oxford: Update Software; 2005;
  2. Dickersin K, Min YI, Meinert CL. Factors influencing publication of research results: follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. JAMA. 1992;263(3):274–278
  3. Hopewell S, Clarke M. Abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology conference: how completely are trials reported?. Clin Trials. 2005;2:265–268
  4. Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Ryan G, Clifton J, Buckingham L, Willan A, et al. Should unpublished data be included in meta-analyses? Current convictions and controversies. JAMA. 1993;269(21):2749–2753
  5. Moher D, Schultz KF, Altman DG for the CONSORT group. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:657–661
  6. Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Inadequate reporting of controlled trials as short reports. Lancet. 1998;352:1908
  7. Hayes RB, Mulrow CD, Huth EJ, Altman DG, Gardner MJ. More informative abstracts revisited. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1996;33:1–9
  8. Ciesla MC, Wojcik D. Outcomes of cytopathology studies presented at national pathology meetings. Diagn Cytopathol. 2001;25(4):265–269
  9. Roy D, Sankar JP, Hughes A, Jones A, Fenton JE. Publication rates of scientific papers presented at the Otorhinolaryngological Research Society meetings. Clin Otolaryngol. 2001;26(3):253–256
  10. Sprague S, Bhandari M, Devereaux PJ, Swiontkowski F, Tornetta P, Cook DJ, et al. Barriers to full-text publication following presentation of abstracts at annual orthopaedic meetings. Bone Joint Surg. 2003;85(1):158–163
  11. Weintraub WH. Are published manuscripts representative of the surgical meeting abstracts? An objective appraisal. Pediatr Surg. 1987;22(1):11–13
  12. Chokkalingam A, Scherer R, Dickersin K. Agreement of data in abstracts compared to full publications. Control Clin Trials. 1998;19(Suppl 1):61S–62S
  13. Davies MW, Dunster CE, East CS, Lingwood BE. Fate of abstracts published in the proceedings of the first annual Perinatal Society of Australia and New Zealand Congress in 1997. J Paediatr Child Health. 2002;38(5):501–506
  14. Klassen TP, Wiebe N, Russell K, Stevens K, Hartling L, Craig WR, et al. Abstracts of randomized controlled trials presented at the Society of Pediatric Research Meeting: an example of publication bias. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2002;156(5):474–480
  15. Chalmers I. Using systematic reviews and registers of ongoing trials for scientific and ethical trial design, monitoring, and reporting. In:  Egger M,  Davey-Smith G,  Altman DG editor. Systematic reviews in heath care: meta-analysis in context. 2nd ed.. London: BMJ Books; 2001;p. 429–443

PII: S0895-4356(06)00014-X

doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.09.016

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 59, Issue 7 , Pages 681-684 , July 2006

Article Tools