首页> 外文期刊>The journal of trauma and acute care surgery >Don't forget the posters! Quality and content variables associated with accepted abstracts at a national trauma meeting.
【24h】

Don't forget the posters! Quality and content variables associated with accepted abstracts at a national trauma meeting.

机译:不要忘记海报!与全国创伤大会上被接受的摘要相关的质量和内容变量。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND:: As a primary venue for presenting research results, abstracts selected for presentation at national meetings should be of the highest scientific merit and research quality. It is uncertain to what degree this is achieved as the methodological quality of abstracts submitted to national surgical meetings has not been previously described. The objective of this study was to evaluate abstracts presented at a leading trauma meeting for methodological quality. METHODS:: All abstracts accepted for the 2009 American Association for the Surgery of Trauma meeting were reviewed and scored for methodological quality based on 10 criteria (scores, 0-10; 10 being the highest). Criteria were based on nationally published methodology guidelines. Two independent reviewers who were blinded to institution, region, and author reviewed each abstract. RESULTS:: A total of 187 abstracts were accepted for presentation (67 oral and 120 posters). The most frequent clinical topics were shock/transfusion (23%), abdomen (12%), and nervous system (11%). Shock/transfusion abstracts were more common in the oral presentations (31% vs. 19%; p = 0.06). Abstracts from the northeast and south regions were the most common in both oral (26% and 29%) and posters (25% and 24%). Basic science accounted for 12% of accepted studies, while 51% were clinical and 28% were health services/outcomes. Only 8% of abstracts presented randomized data and only 11% reported null findings. Overall abstract scores ranged from 3 to 10 (median, 7; mean, 7.4). Abstracts selected for poster presentation had an overall higher score than those selected for oral presentation (7.4 ± 1.7 vs. 6.8 ± 1.7; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION:: Although oral presentations traditionally receive the most attention and interest, the methodological quality of abstracts accepted for poster presentation equals (and sometimes exceeds) that of oral abstracts. Attendees of these national meetings should reconsider their time spent in viewing and visiting these poster sessions as with the oral presentations. In light of our findings, we highly encourage that all members and guests attend the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Poster Rounds at each year's scientific assembly.
机译:背景:作为发表研究成果的主要场所,选择在国家会议上发表的摘要应具有最高的科学价值和研究质量。由于以前没有描述过提交给国家外科会议的摘要的方法学质量,因此尚不确定达到何种程度。这项研究的目的是评估在一次主要创伤会议上提交的摘要的方法学质量。方法:对2009年美国创伤外科协会会议上接受的所有摘要进行了审查,并根据10项标准(得分为0-10; 10为最高)对方法质量进行评分。标准基于国家发布的方法指南。两位对机构,地区和作者不了解的独立审稿人审阅了每个摘要。结果:共有187篇摘要被发表(67篇口头和120篇海报)。最常见的临床主题是休克/输血(23%),腹部(12%)和神经系统(11%)。休克/输血摘要在口头报告中更为常见(31%比19%; p = 0.06)。东北和南部地区的摘要在口头(26%和29%)和张贴者(25%和24%)中最常见。基础科学占接受研究的12%,而临床占51%,卫生服务/成果占28%。只有8%的摘要提供了随机数据,只有11%的报告没有发现。总体抽象分数在3到10之间(中位数为7;平均值为7.4)。选择用于海报展示的摘要的总体得分要高于通过口头演讲选择的摘要(7.4±1.7对6.8±1.7; p = 0.02)。结论:尽管传统上口头演讲受到最多的关注和关注,但海报演示所接受的摘要的方法学质量与口头摘要相同(有时甚至超过)。与口头介绍一样,这些国家会议的参加者应重新考虑他们在观看和参观这些海报会议上花费的时间。根据我们的发现,我们强烈鼓励所有成员和嘉宾参加每年一次的科学大会的美国创伤外科手术海报展回合。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号