| Summary: | Background: We conducted a survey among anesthesiologists in a Singapore Anesthesiology Academic Clinical Program to investigate the rate of successful publications following conference abstract submissions, the reasons for not submitting manuscripts, and unsuccessful publications. Materials and Methods: Anonymous online survey enquired about respondents' publication records, the number of abstracts submitted and accepted, the number of manuscripts written and their status in the past 3 years, the reasons for not submitting manuscripts following abstract submission, unsuccessful publications, and the types of published articles. Statistical analyses included the descriptive statistics and comparisons between two subgroups of clinician (Senior Resident/Associate Consultant [SRAC], Consultant [C]). Results: There were 68 responses to the survey. A total of 175 local and international conferences abstract submissions were accepted from May 2016 to May 2019. Of these, 67 (38.3%) were written into full-length manuscripts and 64 (36.5%) were published. The top reasons for the lack of manuscripts were “the low likelihood to be accepted for the publication due to methodological reasons,” “no intention to write the abstracts to manuscripts,” and “lack of time to prepare manuscripts.” The most common categories of published articles were case report/case series, retrospective, and prospective studies. The SRAC group (n = 41) reported higher number of retrospective studies than the C group (n = 27): 14 versus 3 studies, P = 0.045. Clinical research and medical education were the main successful publication domains. Conclusion: A minority of 36.5% (N = 65) of the abstracts submitted to conferences were published. This study identified potential areas where support can be given to anesthesiologists to improve publication success.
|
|---|