Online ve Yüz Yüze Yapılan Aile Hekimliği Kongrelerinin Bildiri Raporlama Kalitesinin Değerlendirilmesi: Kesitsel Bir Çalışma

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, COVID-19 pandemisi öncesinde yüz yüze gerçekleştirilen 18. Ulusal Aile Hekimliği Kongresi ve pandemi sırasında ilk çevrimiçi kongre olan 19. Ulusal Aile Hekimliği Kongresi’nde sunulan bildirilerin STROBE kriterlerine göre raporlama kalitesini karşılaştırmak amaçlanmıştır. Yöntem: Çalışmamız kesitsel analitik bir çalışmadır. Kongre özet kitabında yer alan sözlü ve poster özetler çalışmaya dahil edildi. Toplam 266 özet incelendi. STROBE puanı, özet her maddede özelliği içeriyorsa "1", içermiyorsa "0" verilerek toplam 11 puan üzerinden oluşturuldu. Özetler iki farklı hakem tarafından ayrı ayrı değerlendirilerek STROBE puanları karşılaştırıldı. Tanımlayıcı istatistikler, Ki-kare testi, Student t-testi, pearson korelasyon ve Mann-Whitney U testi kullanıldı. İstatistiksel anlamlılık düzeyi p<0,05 olarak alınmıştır. Bulgular: Online kongrede sözlü bildiri oranı daha yüksek olmasına rağmen bildiri türleri açısından kongreler arasında anlamlı fark yoktu. Makalelerin %93,2'sinde örnekleme yapılmamış veya yapıldığı belirtilmemiştir. Örneklem hesabı yapıldığı belirtilen 18 makalenin tamamı sözlü idi. Tüm makaleler dahil edildiğinde, her iki hakemde de sözlü bildirlerin ortalama STROBE puanları, poster bildirilerin ortalama puanlarından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı derecede yüksekti. Kongrelere göre sunum puanları incelendiğinde aynı gruplarda 18. ve 19. Ulusal Aile Hekimliği Kongreleri arasında anlamlı fark bulunmadı. Sonuç: Online kongre formatı bildirilerin raporlama kalitesini etkilememiştir. Her iki kongre raporlama kalitesi de iyi olmakla birlikte iyileştirme potansiyeline sahiptir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Kongre, araştırma raporu, online sistemler, raporlama kalitesi

Evaluation of Quality of Paper Reporting Online and Face-to-Face Family Medicine Congresses: A Cross-Sectional Study

Objective: Our study aimed to evaluate the paper reporting quality of the 18th National Family Medicine Congress, which was held face-to-face before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the 19th National Family Medicine Congress, which was the first online congress during the pandemic, according to the STROBE criteria. Methods: Our study is cross-sectional analytical. Oral and poster abstracts accepted and included in the congress abstract book were included in the study. A total of 266 abstracts were reviewed. STROBE score was created out of 11 points in total by giving a "1" point if the abstract included the feature in each item and a "0" if it did not. The STROBE scores were compared by evaluating the abstracts separately by two different reviewers. Descriptive statistics, Chi-square test, Student's t-test, Pearson correlation, and Mann-Whitney U test were used. The statistical significance level was taken as p<0.05. Results: Although the rate of verbal presentations was higher in the online congress, there was no significant difference between the congresses regarding the types of papers. In 93.2% of the papers, sampling was not done, or it was not stated that it was done. All of the 18 papers stated to be sample calculations were verbal. When all papers were included, the mean STROBE scores of verbal papers were statistically significantly higher than the scores of poster papers in both reviewers. When the presentation scores according to the congresses were examined, no significant difference was found between the 18th and 19th National Family Medicine Congresses in the same groups. Conclusion: The online congress format did not affect the reporting quality of the papers. Both congresses have good reporting quality but have the potential for improvement.

Keywords:

Congress, research report, online systems, reporting quality,

PDF

___

1. Scherer RW, Meerpohl JJ, Pfeifer N, Schmucker C, Schwarzer G, von Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2018(11).
2. Çekmecelioğlu BT, Kozanhan B, Eren G. Publication rate of abstracts orally presented at the Turkish Society of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation National Congresses. Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology Reanimation. 2019;47(2):151.
3. Ipekci T, Yuksel M, Karamık K, Anil H, Tunckiran A. Publication Rates and Citation Analysis of Oral and Poster Presentations at the First Congress of the Society of Urological Surgery in Turkiye. J Urol Surg. 2018.
4. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, et al. CONSORT for reporting randomised trials in journal and conference abstracts. The Lancet. 2008;371(9609):281-283.
5. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. Jama. 1996;276(8):637-639.
6. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. The Lancet. 2007;370(9596):1453-1457.
7. Hasbahçeci M, Başak F, Uysal Ö. 2010 ve 2012 Ulusal Cerrahi Kongreleri sözel bildiri raporlama kalitesinin CONSORT, STROBE ve Timmer kriterleri ile değerlendirilmesi. Turkish Journal of Surgery/Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi. 2014;30(3).
8. Erdağ TK, Durmuşoğlu M, Demir AO, Doğan E, İkiz AÖ. Türk ulusal kulak burun boğaz ve baş boyun cerrahisi kongre bildirilerinin analizi ve yayımlanma oranları. The Turkish Journal of Ear Nose Throat. 2014;24(2):89-96.
9. Yoon U, Knobloch K. Assessment of reporting quality of conference abstracts in sports injury prevention according to CONSORT and STROBE criteria and their subsequent publication rate as full papers. BMC medical research methodology. 2012;12:1-9.
10. Ohtori S, Orita S, Eguchi Y, et al. Oral Presentations Have a Significantly Higher Publication Rate, But Not Impact Factors, Than Poster Presentations at the International Society for Study of Lumbar Spine Meeting: Review of 1,126 Abstracts From 2010 to 2012 Meetings. SPINE. 2018;43(19):1347-1354.
11. Özyurt S, Kaptanoğlu A. 2004-2008 yılları arasında iki yılda bir yapılan ulusal dermatoloji kongrelerinde sunulan özetlerin yayınlanma oranları. Dermatoz. 2012;3(1):7-11.