Title: From abstract to impact in cardiovascular research: factors predicting publication and citation
Authors: Winnik, Stephan ×
Raptis, Dimitri A
Walker, Janina H
Hasun, Matthias
Speer, Thimotheus
Clavien, Pierre-Alain
Komajda, Michel
Bax, Jeroen J
Tendera, Michal
Fox, Kim
Van de Werf, Frans
Mundow, Ciara
Lüscher, Thomas F
Ruschitzka, Frank
Matter, Christian M #
Issue Date: Dec-2012
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Series Title: European Heart Journal vol:33 issue:24 pages:3034-3045
Abstract: AimsThrough 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.
ISSN: 0195-668X
Publication status: published
KU Leuven publication type: IT
Appears in Collections:Cardiology
× corresponding author
# (joint) last author

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.

Request a copy


All items in Lirias are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

© Web of science