Temporal and comparative outcomes of cardiac electrophysiology abstracts

Abstract

Although conferences are important vehicles for discussing scientific findings, the translation of presented research into peer-reviewed manuscripts is a crucial subsequent step in the research process. Given the evolving subspecialization of cardiology, we sought to characterize the temporal and comparative outcomes of abstracts presented at a subspecialty cardiac electrophysiology conference. Abstracts presented at the Heart Rhythm Society conference (1994 through 2006; HRS abstracts) and abstracts presented at the American Heart Association conference (2003; AHA abstracts) were studied. Subsequent publications, impact factors, and citation rates were determined. A total of 3,850 HRS and 1,000 AHA abstracts were studied. More human abstracts were presented at HRS than AHA (p <0.05). Compared with HRS abstracts, more AHA abstracts were published (p <0.001) and had higher impact factors and citation rates (p <0.001 for both). These differences were attributable in part to the greater proportion of human HRS abstracts. Compared with HRS abstracts, electrophysiology-related AHA abstracts were published less (p <0.001), and these publications had similar impact factors (p = 0.38) although greater citation rates (p = 0.001). The number and publication rate of HRS abstracts increased over the 15-year period, as did their publication impact factors and citation rates (p <0.001 for all). In conclusion, there are significant differences between AHA and HRS abstracts. Although AHA abstracts were more likely to be published overall, the publication rate and impact of electrophysiology abstracts presented at both a subspecialty (HRS) and a major cardiovascular conference (AHA) were comparable. There has also been a growth in the number and impact of cardiac electrophysiology abstracts presented at HRS in recent years.