Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
BMC Med Educ. 2017 Nov 9;17(1):193. doi: 10.1186/s12909-017-1048-3.

Conference presentation to publication: a retrospective study evaluating quality of abstracts and journal articles in medical education research.

Author information

1
Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. stephenson.christopher@mayo.edu.
2
Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
3
Harborview, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
4
Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
5
Division of Primary Care Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

There is little evidence regarding the comparative quality of abstracts and articles in medical education research. The Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI), which was developed to evaluate the quality of reporting in medical education, has strong validity evidence for content, internal structure, and relationships to other variables. We used the MERSQI to compare the quality of reporting for conference abstracts, journal abstracts, and published articles.

METHODS:

This is a retrospective study of all 46 medical education research abstracts submitted to the Society of General Internal Medicine 2009 Annual Meeting that were subsequently published in a peer-reviewed journal. We compared MERSQI scores of the abstracts with scores for their corresponding published journal abstracts and articles. Comparisons were performed using the signed rank test.

RESULTS:

Overall MERSQI scores increased significantly for published articles compared with conference abstracts (11.33 vs 9.67; P < .001) and journal abstracts (11.33 vs 9.96; P < .001). Regarding MERSQI subscales, published articles had higher MERSQI scores than conference abstracts in the domains of sampling (1.59 vs 1.34; P = .006), data analysis (3.00 vs 2.43; P < .001), and validity of evaluation instrument (1.04 vs 0.28; P < .001). Published articles also had higher MERSQI scores than journal abstracts in the domains of data analysis (3.00 vs 2.70; P = .004) and validity of evaluation instrument (1.04 vs 0.26; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS:

To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare the quality of medical education abstracts and journal articles using the MERSQI. Overall, the quality of articles was greater than that of abstracts. However, there were no significant differences between abstracts and articles for the domains of study design and outcomes, which indicates that these MERSQI elements may be applicable to abstracts. Findings also suggest that abstract quality is generally preserved from original presentation to publication.

KEYWORDS:

Medical education; Medical education–outcomes research; Quality assessment

PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center