Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

From abstract to impact in cardiovascular research: factors predicting publication and citation


Winnik, S; Raptis, D A; Walker, J H; Hasun, M; Speer, T; Clavien, P A; Komajda, M; Bax, J J; Tendera, M; Fox, K; Van de Werf, F; Mundow, C; Luscher, T F; Ruschitzka, F; Matter, C M (2012). From abstract to impact in cardiovascular research: factors predicting publication and citation. European Heart Journal, 33(24):3034-3045.

Abstract

Through a 4-year follow-up of the abstracts submitted to the European Society of Cardiology Congress in 2006, we aimed at identifying factors predicting high-quality research, appraising the quality of the peer review and editorial processes, and thereby revealing potential ways to improve future research, peer review, and editorial work.Methods and resultsAll abstracts submitted in 2006 were assessed for acceptance, presentation format, and average reviewer rating. Accepted and rejected studies were followed for 4 years. Multivariate regression analyses of a representative selection of 10% of all abstracts (n= 1002) were performed to identify factors predicting acceptance, subsequent publication, and citation. A total of 10 020 abstracts were submitted, 3104 (31%) were accepted for poster, and 701 (7%) for oral presentation. At Congress level, basic research, a patient number >/= 100, and prospective study design were identified as independent predictors of acceptance. These factors differed from those predicting full-text publication, which included academic affiliation. The single parameter predicting frequent citation was study design with randomized controlled trials reaching the highest citation rates. The publication rate of accepted studies was 38%, whereas only 24% of rejected studies were published. Among published studies, those accepted at the Congress received higher citation rates than rejected ones.ConclusionsResearch of high quality was determined by study design and largely identified at Congress level through blinded peer review. The scientometric follow-up revealed a marked disparity between predictors of full-text publication and those predicting citation or acceptance at the Congress.

Abstract

Through a 4-year follow-up of the abstracts submitted to the European Society of Cardiology Congress in 2006, we aimed at identifying factors predicting high-quality research, appraising the quality of the peer review and editorial processes, and thereby revealing potential ways to improve future research, peer review, and editorial work.Methods and resultsAll abstracts submitted in 2006 were assessed for acceptance, presentation format, and average reviewer rating. Accepted and rejected studies were followed for 4 years. Multivariate regression analyses of a representative selection of 10% of all abstracts (n= 1002) were performed to identify factors predicting acceptance, subsequent publication, and citation. A total of 10 020 abstracts were submitted, 3104 (31%) were accepted for poster, and 701 (7%) for oral presentation. At Congress level, basic research, a patient number >/= 100, and prospective study design were identified as independent predictors of acceptance. These factors differed from those predicting full-text publication, which included academic affiliation. The single parameter predicting frequent citation was study design with randomized controlled trials reaching the highest citation rates. The publication rate of accepted studies was 38%, whereas only 24% of rejected studies were published. Among published studies, those accepted at the Congress received higher citation rates than rejected ones.ConclusionsResearch of high quality was determined by study design and largely identified at Congress level through blinded peer review. The scientometric follow-up revealed a marked disparity between predictors of full-text publication and those predicting citation or acceptance at the Congress.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
38 citations in Web of Science®
42 citations in Scopus®
65 citations in Microsoft Academic
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

142 downloads since deposited on 31 Jul 2012
10 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Cardiology
04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Visceral and Transplantation Surgery
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:5 June 2012
Deposited On:31 Jul 2012 12:55
Last Modified:24 Sep 2018 07:20
Publisher:Oxford University Press
ISSN:0195-668X
Additional Information:This is a pre-copy-editing, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in European Heart Journal following peer review. The definitive publisher-authenticated version From abstract to impact in cardiovascular research: factors predicting publication and citation is available online at: http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2012/06/01/eurheartj.ehs113
OA Status:Hybrid
Free access at:PubMed ID. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehs113
PubMed ID:22669850

Download

Download PDF  'From abstract to impact in cardiovascular research: factors predicting publication and citation'.
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 289kB
View at publisher
Download PDF  'From abstract to impact in cardiovascular research: factors predicting publication and citation'.
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 487kB
Download PDF  'From abstract to impact in cardiovascular research: factors predicting publication and citation'.
Preview
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 302kB