OBJECTIVE: To evaluate what proportion of abstracts presented at the Society of Gynecologic Surgeons (SGS) Annual Scientific Meetings went on to be published in publicly available journals.
METHODS: Retrospective observational study SETTING: Single organization PARTICIPANTS: Abstracts (oral presentations, oral posters, video presentations, non-oral posters) presented at the SGS Annual Scientific Meeting from 2013-2020 INTERVENTIONS: Variables were collected pertaining to abstract authors, study type, timing of the session presented, and journal factors. To identify possible publication, abstracts were cross-referenced in PubMed and Google Scholar.
RESULTS: A total of 912 abstracts were reviewed: 155 oral presentations, 184 oral posters, 79 video presentations, and 490 non-oral posters. 45.8% of abstracts went on to publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Most abstracts (75.0%) were published from institutions with a fellowship presence and at a university-based program (71.5%). The five most represented institutions presented 27.5% of all abstracts during an SGS session. Oral presentations were more likely than oral posters to be structured as randomized controlled trials (20% vs 9%, p=.028), and to be published in a journal with a higher impact factor (6.36 ± 11.74 vs. 3.88 ± 2.72, p=.031). Type of presentation and fellowship presence significantly affected the likelihood of abstract publication (oral presentation OR 0.73, 95% CI [0.466, 1.141], p=0.167; video OR 0.14, 95% CI [0.075, 0.261; non-oral poster OR 0.30, 95% CI [0.204, 0.439]; p<.001; fellowship OR 1.62, 95% CI [1.167, 2.237], p=.004).
CONCLUSIONS: Over eight years of the SGS Annual Scientific Meeting, the rate of abstract publication was 45.8%. Abstract origination from an academic institution with a fellowship program significantly affected the likelihood of publication. Abstract presentation at a society meeting is a prestigious opportunity, and prioritization of resources and elimination of barriers should be encouraged to further promote progression of these projects to publication.

The Spartan Medical Research Journal (SMRJ) is pleased to publish abstracts from the First Annual Research Day hosted by the Michigan State University College of Osteopathic Medicine (MSUCOM), held in Novi, Michigan, on May 15, 2023. Sponsored by MSUCOM, the Statewide Campus System (SCS), and Research, Innovation, and Scholarly Engagement (RISE), this event showcased a total of 139 selected research abstracts following a meticulous blinded review by the MSUCOM Research Day Planning Committee and SMRJ editorial staff. These abstracts were subsequently presented at the MSUCOM First Annual Research Day in 2023, with awards for exceptional oral and poster presentations conferred on May 15, 2023. Of the 139 presentations that were ultimately chosen, 45 authors consented and elected to have their abstracts published in SMRJ. The abstracts from 2023 encompass a wide array of contemporary medical and clinical subjects, incorporating a variety of research designs that cover basic science, clinical research, case reports, medical education, and quality improvement. While abstracts offer concise overview of research projects or presentations, they do not permit a comprehensive evaluation of the scientific rigor employed in the respective works. Although these abstracts offer preliminary results that may necessitate further refinement and validation, they serve a vital function in disseminating novel research concepts and advancements in the discipline of medicine. This knowledge-sharing promotes meaningful dialogue among researchers, clinicians, and educators, thereby making a valuable contribution to the collective body of knowledge in the fields of medical sciences and osteopathic medicine. Andrea Amalfitano, DO, PhD Osteopathic Heritage Foundation Professor of Pediatrics, Microbiology and Molecular Genetics Professor, BioMolecular Science Gateway Editor-in-Chief, Spartan Medical Research Journal (SMRJ) MSU College of Osteopathic Medicine- Statewide Campus System C. Patricia Obando S., PhD Associate Dean and DIO, Graduate Medical Education Associate Professor- MSU College of Osteopathic Medicine- Statewide Campus System Rana Ismail, PhD, MSc, CPHQ Director of Research Editor, Spartan Medical Research Journal (SMRJ) MSU College of Osteopathic Medicine- Statewide Campus System Francis Akenami, BMLS, PhD, MSc, FIMLS Managing Editor Spartan Medical Research Journal (SMRJ) MSU College of Osteopathic Medicine- Statewide Campus System.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: Prior studies reveal that invited speaker panels, editorial boards, authors of practice guidelines, and senior authors of published articles are disproportionately male in the neurology field. We aimed to analyze a gender gap in authorship of accepted abstracts to the American Academy of Neurology annual meetings in 2020 and 2021.
UNASSIGNED: This is a cross-sectional study evaluating the proportions of female first and senior abstract authors in 2020 and 2021. Abstracts were reviewed manually (n = 3,211 in 2020; n = 2,178 in 2021). Data were collected regarding the gender of first and senior authors, subspecialties, and origin of research (USA, international, or corporate-affiliated). Then, we compared the percentages of female first and senior authors in the 2 years to assess for any short-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
UNASSIGNED: Accepted abstracts with female first and senior authors comprised 46%, 34% in 2020, and the same in 2021, without change. Female senior authors had a significantly higher proportion of female first authors than their male senior author counterparts. The analysis of subspecialties with more than 100 abstracts showed the lowest percentages of female senior authors was oncology (24.7%), sleep (25.5%), headache (28.7%), and cerebrovascular disease (29%) in 2020. Cerebrovascular disease (29%) and behavioral neurology (24.7%) had the lowest percentage of female senior authors in 2021. In the analysis of the origin of research, corporate-affiliated authors had the lowest percentages of female first (34 and 36%) and senior authors (22.6 and 27.6%).
UNASSIGNED: The gender gap in neurology was reaffirmed in regards to female senior authorship overall and in subgroups of abstracts including cerebrovascular disease, headache, behavioral neurology, sleep, oncology, and corporate-affiliated research.

Two hundred sixteen abstracts were selected for presentation at the 2024 American College of Medical Toxicology (ACMT) Annual Scientific Meeting on April 12-14, 2024, in Washington, DC. The quality and breadth of toxicology scholarship continues to grow as our field expands. The complete 2024 ASM abstract book in the April issue of JMT includes original research studies from around the world and the ToxIC Investigators Consortium, clinically significant case reports describing toxicologic phenomena, and selected encore research presentations from other scientific meetings.

ChatGPT may act as a research assistant to help organize the direction of thinking and summarize research findings. However, few studies have examined the quality, similarity (abstracts being similar to the original one), and accuracy of the abstracts generated by ChatGPT when researchers provide full-text basic research papers.
We aimed to assess the applicability of an artificial intelligence (AI) model in generating abstracts for basic preclinical research.
We selected 30 basic research papers from Nature, Genome Biology, and Biological Psychiatry. Excluding abstracts, we inputted the full text into ChatPDF, an application of a language model based on ChatGPT, and we prompted it to generate abstracts with the same style as used in the original papers. A total of 8 experts were invited to evaluate the quality of these abstracts (based on a Likert scale of 0-10) and identify which abstracts were generated by ChatPDF, using a blind approach. These abstracts were also evaluated for their similarity to the original abstracts and the accuracy of the AI content.
The quality of ChatGPT-generated abstracts was lower than that of the actual abstracts (10-point Likert scale: mean 4.72, SD 2.09 vs mean 8.09, SD 1.03; P<.001). The difference in quality was significant in the unstructured format (mean difference -4.33; 95% CI -4.79 to -3.86; P<.001) but minimal in the 4-subheading structured format (mean difference -2.33; 95% CI -2.79 to -1.86). Among the 30 ChatGPT-generated abstracts, 3 showed wrong conclusions, and 10 were identified as AI content. The mean percentage of similarity between the original and the generated abstracts was not high (2.10%-4.40%). The blinded reviewers achieved a 93% (224/240) accuracy rate in guessing which abstracts were written using ChatGPT.
Using ChatGPT to generate a scientific abstract may not lead to issues of similarity when using real full texts written by humans. However, the quality of the ChatGPT-generated abstracts was suboptimal, and their accuracy was not 100%.

BACKGROUND: Submitting research abstracts to scientific societies is expected in academic medicine and requires dedicated time and effort. The authors queried mentors and mentees to ascertain what topics and proposed strategies should be included in a new curriculum to enhance the abstract submission process.
METHODS: Between May 2019 and March 2020, the authors enrolled 14 senior-rank mentors from diverse disciplines at a tertiary musculoskeletal center and their 14-paired mentees (mostly residents and fellows) into a several-component qualitative study consisting of in-depth interviews several months before abstract submission addressing prior experiences, and longitudinal follow-up interviews 1 month before, 1 week before, and 1 week after submission to uncover challenges faced during the actual process and strategies that were effective in overcoming these challenges. Additional contacts occurred through November 2020 to ascertain outcomes of submissions. Mentors and mentees were unaware of each other\'s responses. Responses were grouped into categories using grounded theory and a comparative analytic strategy.
RESULTS: At enrollment participants recounted details from prior abstracts that included experiences with the submission process such as format, content, and online requirements, and experiences with interpersonal interactions such as managing coinvestigators\' competing priories and consulting with statisticians in a timely manner. Benefits of submitting abstracts included advancing mentees\' careers and increasing research methodology rigor. Challenges encountered during the submission process included meeting deadlines before all data were acquired, time away from other responsibilities, and uncertainty about handling changing conclusions as more data accrued. Delayed feedback from coinvestigators and broadening the scope or changing the focus of the abstract compounded the time crunch to meet the submission deadline. At the time of abstract submission mentor-mentee pairs agreed that major challenges were dealing with collaborators, incomplete data/limited results, and different work styles. The authors developed a proposal for a comprehensive curriculum to include organizational, technical and interpersonal topics.
CONCLUSIONS: This longitudinal qualitative study involving mentor-mentee pairs revealed multiple benefits and challenges associated with submitting research abstracts. These findings provide the foundation for a comprehensive curriculum to enhance this recurring labor-intensive undertaking and cornerstone of academic medicine.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of a preliminary session of the International Continence on Incontinence-Research Society (ICI-RS) was to provide a forum for an international group of experimental scientists, who are members of ICI-RS, to explain their on-going work to fellow laboratory scientists, to obtain feedback about future directions and discuss potential future collaborations.
METHODS: Fourteen Individual abstracts are presented as submitted by the attendees.
CONCLUSIONS: The presentations and attendant abstracts reflect a wide variety of fundamental research currently underway that is designed to have translational outputs with respect to the management and treatment of lower urinary tract pathologies.

The International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy is pleased to publish abstracts from the thirteenth Orthopaedic Summit (OSET) taking place in Boston, September 19-23, 2023. The IJSPT hosted the third annual research forum and reception at OSET, sponsored by ATI Physical Therapy and Hyperice. The abstracts presented in the following pages were selected by the OSET Research Committee and editorial staff of the International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy. After careful review, a total of 20 research abstracts were accepted and presented at OSET 2023. Awards for outstanding abstracts were presented on September 22. The 2023 abstracts include contemporary orthopaedic and rehabilitation topics across various research designs. Each abstract presents only a brief summary of a research project / presentation and does not permit full assessment of the scientific rigor with which the work was conducted. While the abstracts offer only preliminary results that may require further refinement and future validation, they do serve an important role in sharing new research ideas and rehabilitation advancements. This sharing of ideas helps to encourage dialogue among researchers, clinicians, and educators that will ultimately contribute to the orthopaedic and rehabilitation body of knowledge. We strongly encourage authors to continue pursuing the publication of their research as a full manuscript. Thank you to all submitting abstracts for consideration. We look forward to another outstanding season of submissions for OSET in 2024. Phil Page PhD, PT, ATC Chuck Thigpen PhD, PT, ATC OSET Research Committee Co-Chairs.

UNASSIGNED: The Society for Education in Anesthesia (SEA) promotes dissemination of discoveries and innovations. We investigated the rate of publication of SEA Spring Meeting abstracts, hypothesizing that Research abstracts were published more frequently than Innovative Curriculum abstracts. We also studied the time between abstract presentation and publication and tracked the journals in which they were published.
UNASSIGNED: All abstracts presented at SEA spring meetings from 2011-2019 were included. We searched PubMed for published articles that were based on those SEA abstracts. We calculated the overall publication rate and the respective publication rates for Research and Innovative Curriculum abstracts. We calculated odds ratio (OR) and performed the Pearson χ2 test to compare publication rates between Research abstracts and Innovative Curriculum abstracts. We calculated the mean number of years between meeting presentation and publication and tabulated the number of works published in each journal.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 351 abstracts (128 Research and 223 Curriculum) were presented at SEA spring meetings. The overall publication rate was 15% (52/351). Research abstracts were published more frequently than Curriculum abstracts: 24.2% (31/128) versus 9.4% (21/223); OR = 3.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.7-5.6); P = .0003. The mean time from presentation to publication was 1.7 ± 1.3 years. The works appeared in 20 different journals.
UNASSIGNED: SEA Spring Meeting abstracts were published less frequently than abstracts from other medical professional society meetings (21%-72.3%). Although the lower publication rate of Innovative Curriculum abstracts unique to the SEA meeting largely explains this shortfall, a relatively low publication rate, even for the Research abstracts, signals opportunities for growth.