BMJ Open (Feb 2020)

Analysis of conference abstracts of prosthodontic randomised-controlled trials presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015): a cross-sectional study of the relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication

  • Junsheng Chen,
  • Yubin Cao,
  • Meijie Wang,
  • Xueqi Gan,
  • Chunjie Li,
  • Haiyang Yu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034635
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 10, no. 2

Abstract

Read online

ObjectivesTo analyse the relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication rate of conference abstracts of prosthodontic randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) presented at International Association for Dental Research (IADR) general sessions (2002–2015).DesignA cross-sectional study on conference abstracts.MethodsConference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015) were obtained. Literature search was performed in multiple databases to confirm the final publication status of conference abstracts. Two investigators independently extracted the data including conference date, origin, presentation type, exact p value, number of centres, institution type, overall conclusion, subspecialty, publication time and journal. The reporting quality of abstracts was assessed by two investigators according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement. The relationship between demographic characteristics, reporting quality and final publication was analysed by χ2 test.Setting, participants and interventionsNot applicable.Primary and secondary outcome measuresFinal publication rate, demographic characteristics and reporting quality of conference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015).ResultsOf the 340 prosthodontic RCT abstracts, 43.24% were published. The mean time to final publication was 22.86 months. Europe contributed the most number of abstracts but Asia and Australia had the highest publication rate. Oral presentation, multicentre trial and complete denture and overdenture subspecialty were associated with a higher publication rate. Reporting quality of eligibility criteria of participants, random assignment and primary outcome results for each group correlated with a higher final publication rate.ConclusionsOver half of conference abstracts of prosthodontic RCTs presented at IADR general sessions (2002–2015) were unpublished. Oral presentation and multiple centres were associated with higher publication rates. Abstracts’ reporting quality addressing participant recruitment, assignment and primary results correlated with trials’ validity and applicability. Conference attendees may refer to this research to identify valid and applicable prosthodontic trials but should treat and apply results cautiously.