Publication outcomes after conference abstract submissions in a Singapore anesthesiology academic clinical program

Abstract Background Accepted systematic review (SR) methodology requires citation screening by two reviewers to maximise retrieval of eligible studies. We hypothesized that records could be excluded by a single reviewer without loss of sensitivity in two conditions; the record was ineligible for multiple reasons, or the record was ineligible for one or more specific reasons that could be reliably assessed. Methods Twenty-four SRs performed at CHEO, a pediatric health care and research centre in Ottawa, Canada, were divided into derivation and validation sets. Exclusion criteria during abstract screening were sorted into 11 specific categories, with loss in sensitivity determined by individual category and by number of exclusion criteria endorsed. Five single reviewer algorithms that combined individual categories and multiple exclusion criteria were then tested on the derivation and validation sets, with success defined a priori as less than 5% loss of sensitivity. Results The 24 SRs included 930 eligible and 27390 ineligible citations. The reviews were mostly focused on pediatrics (70.8%, N=17/24), but covered various specialties. Using a single reviewer to exclude any citation led to an average loss of sensitivity of 8.6% (95%CI, 6.0–12.1%). Excluding citations with ≥2 exclusion criteria led to 1.2% average loss of sensitivity (95%CI, 0.5–3.1%). Five specific exclusion criteria performed with perfect sensitivity: conference abstract, ineligible age group, case report/series, not human research, and review article. In the derivation set, the five algorithms achieved a loss of sensitivity ranging from 0.0 to 1.9% and work-saved ranging from 14.8 to 39.1%. In the validation set, the loss of sensitivity for all 5 algorithms remained below 2.6%, with work-saved between 10.5% and 48.2%. Conclusions Findings suggest that targeted application of single-reviewer screening, considering both type and number of exclusion criteria, could retain sensitivity and significantly decrease workload. Further research is required to investigate the potential for combining this approach with crowdsourcing or machine learning methodologies.

Download Full-text

Writing a Conference Abstract and Paper for Presentation

Writing for Publication in Nursing and Healthcare ◽

10.1002/9781119583592.ch3 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 23-43

Author(s):

Jan Draper

Keyword(s):

Conference Abstract

Download Full-text

IGILUC conference Abstract Book

Tumori Journal ◽

10.1177/0300891618780025 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 104 (3_suppl) ◽

pp. 3-11

Keyword(s):

Conference Abstract ◽

Abstract Book

Download Full-text

Impact of adjusting for inter-rater variability in conference abstract ranking and selection processes

Australian Occupational Therapy Journal ◽

10.1111/1440-1630.12440 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 65 (1) ◽

pp. 54-62

Author(s):

Justin Newton Scanlan ◽

Natasha A. Lannin ◽

Tammy Hoffmann ◽

Mandy Stanley ◽

Rachael McDonald

Keyword(s):

Ranking And Selection ◽

Conference Abstract ◽

Selection Processes ◽

Rater Variability

Download Full-text

Abstract 5063: Cardiovascular Effects of Transdermal Testosterone in Postmenopausal Women

Circulation ◽

10.1161/circ.118.suppl_18.s_1137-c ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 118 (suppl_18) ◽

Author(s):

C Vitale ◽

P Collins ◽

G Marazzi ◽

G Caminiti ◽

I Lodhi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Hormone Replacement ◽

Cardiovascular Effects ◽

Pooled Analysis ◽

Phase Iii ◽

Double Blind ◽

Treatment Groups ◽

Clinical Program ◽

Large Phase

Testosterone Transdermal Patch (TTP) has been developed for the treatment of postmeno-pausal women (PMW) with hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD). Since the cardiovascular (CV) effects of testosterone in women are still unclear we conducted a pooled analysis of the large phase III clinical program to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 300 μg/day TTP, alone or in association with hormone replacement therapy (HRT), versus placebo in surgical or natural PMW. Design & Methods: A total of 2795 women aged between 26 –70 years (mean age 52(SD=6.8) years) were included in 5 phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials (treatment duration range 24 – 52 weeks) as part of the TTP Clinical program. 4 studies included PMW (natural and surgical, two each respectively) receiving HRT while 1 study was conducted without HRT, in either surgical or natural PMW. Women with known CV disorders were excluded from the studies. Changes from baseline in standard metabolic and CV risk factors were compared. The incidence of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) alone or as a composite CV endpoint was assessed. Results: The 2795 PMW were randomized to receive either placebo (n=1297) or TTP (n=1498). Baseline mean BMI was 27 kg/m2 (SD=5.3 kg/m2) and 56% were naturally menopausal. The demographic and baseline parameters were similar among the treatment groups. No significant changes in CV risk factors (Total Cholesterol, Triglycerides, Insulin, Glucose, Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure) were detected during the study period, apart from a blunting of the increases in HDL-C by TTP at 24 and 52 weeks (Placebo 52-week mean change 2.59 mg/dl vs. TTP 52-week mean change 1.20 mg/dl, p<0.005) and of the decrease in LDL-C by TTP at 24 (p<0.05), but not at 52 weeks. During the double-blind (24 weeks), placebo-controlled period of the combined studies, 4 major CV events (2 MIs and 2 strokes) were reported in placebo patients and 3 (2 MIs and 1 stroke) in those receiving TTP. One VTE occurred in a patient receiving TTP and HRT. Conclusion: TTP therapy in these clinical trials did not adversely affect CV risk profile and did not change the risk of major CV events in these surgical and naturally PMW with or without concomitant HRT.

Download Full-text

Consensus-based recommendations for the use of biosimilars to treat rheumatological diseases

Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ◽

10.1136/annrheumdis-2017-211937 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 77 (2) ◽

pp. 165-174 ◽

Cited By ~ 91

Author(s):

Jonathan Kay ◽

Monika M Schoels ◽

Thomas Dörner ◽

Paul Emery ◽

Tore K Kvien ◽

...

Keyword(s):

English Language ◽

Task Force ◽

Level Of Evidence ◽

Conference Abstract ◽

Consensus Recommendations ◽

American College Of Rheumatology ◽

Published Evidence ◽

Grade Of Recommendation ◽

Scientific Meetings ◽

Rheumatological Diseases

The study aimed to develop evidence-based recommendations regarding the evaluation and use of biosimilars to treat rheumatological diseases. The task force comprised an expert group of specialists in rheumatology, dermatology and gastroenterology, and pharmacologists, patients and a regulator from ten countries. Four key topics regarding biosimilars were identified through a process of discussion and consensus. Using a Delphi process, specific questions were then formulated to guide a systematic literature review. Relevant English-language publications through November 2016 were searched systematically for each topic using Medline; selected papers and pertinent reviews were examined for additional relevant references; and abstracts presented at the 2015 and 2016 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) annual scientific meetings were searched for those about biosimilars. The experts used evidence obtained from these studies to develop a set of overarching principles and consensus recommendations. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation were determined for each. By the search strategy, 490 references were identified. Of these, 29 full-text papers were included in the systematic review. Additionally, 20 abstracts were retrieved from the ACR and EULAR conference abstract databases. Five overarching principles and eight consensus recommendations were generated, encompassing considerations regarding clinical trials, immunogenicity, extrapolation of indications, switching between bio-originators and biosimilars and among biosimilars, and cost. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation for each varied according to available published evidence. Five overarching principles and eight consensus recommendations regarding the evaluation and use of biosimilars to treat rheumatological diseases were developed using research-based evidence and expert opinion.

Download Full-text