Journal of Health Sciences and Medicine
Yazarlar: Aytül BUĞRA, Abdul Kerim BUĞRA
Konular:Sağlık Bilimleri ve Hizmetleri
Anahtar Kelimeler:Oral Presentation,Congress,Pathology
Özet: Aim: In this study, the contribution of the oral presentations presented at national pathology congresses to the literature was investigated. Material and Method: A total of 378 abstracts presented at national pathology congresses between 2014-2018 were scanned in PubMed and Google Academic databases. In order to determine whether these abstracts were obtained from thesis studies, they were scanned in the database of the National Thesis Center. The screening was performed simultaneously with the verbal title and authors. The abstracts were examined in terms of the study design, the type of institution where the study was conducted, whether it was a thesis study, the status of its publication in scientific journals, the type of peer-reviewed journal in which it was published, and the time from presentation to publication. Results: 47.4% (n=179) of 378 papers were retrospective and 52.6% (n=199) were prospective studies. 73.5% (n=278) of the studies of the presentations were done in universities, 23.5% (n=89) in training and research hospitals, and 3% (n=11) in other institutions. 16.9% (n=64) of the abstracts were obtained from the thesis. A total of 27% (n=102) of the abstracts were published in a scientific journal as an article. A significant difference was found in terms of publication in prospective studies compared to retrospective studies (p=0.03). University hospitals had the highest rate (25.5%, n=71). The average period of publication of papers in a scientific journal was 15.0 ±12.3 months (0-68.9) months. 61.8% (n=63) of the abstracts were published in SCI(E) journals, 18.6% (n=19) in other international peer-review journals and 19.6% (n=20) in national peer-review journals. Conclusion: We believe that researchers should develop not only oral presentation but also encouraging methods to transform studies into publications.