Publication Bias Among Conference Abstracts Reporting on Pediatric Quality Improvement Projects

Abstract

This study evaluated progress to publication of pediatric quality improvement (QI) projects initially presented as national conference abstracts, according to project findings and other characteristics. QI abstracts were identified among presentations at the 2010-2015 American Academy of Pediatrics National Conference & Exhibition, and publications were tracked through June 2018. Positive findings (improvement on at least 1 quantitative project outcome), interventions, and analyses were correlated with journal publication. Of 142 abstracts, 128 (90%) reported positive findings. Forty-nine positive abstracts and 3 abstracts reporting negative results resulted in publication (38% vs 21%, respectively; P = .256). Median time to publication was 1.2 years for projects with positive findings, compared to >3 years for abstracts with negative findings ( P = .029). Ninety percent of abstracts reported positive findings, and these abstracts progressed to publication more quickly. Overcoming publication bias for pediatric QI projects may enhance selection of promising interventions as new projects are designed.

Scholarly Impact of Quality Improvement Reports in Neonatology

“…Project characteristics that were collected included primary setting (NICU, newborn nursery, intermediate care unit, or special care nursery), single-center versus multicenter project, types of outcomes (process measures, involving a system process change; patient measures, involving patient health outcomes; or cost measures, involving any cost outcome), types of interventions (family education, provider education, organizational change, technological change), duration of the intervention period, and analytic approach (statistical process control [SPC], prepoststatistical comparisons, multivariable regression). 1,[9][10][11][12] All outcomes and interventions in the included QI publications were described in enough detail to classify into one of the categories listed above.…”

“…Scholarly articles reporting the outcomes of QI projects disseminate successful approaches and lessons learned, accelerating the pace of practice improvement. 1,2 In Neonatology, QI projects have led to documented improvement in a wide range of patient outcomes, such as reducing the incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia, patient morbidity, and length of stay. [3][4][5] However, it is unclear whether the results of published projects inform subsequent scientific publications, in contrast to traditional research studies, which are explicitly intended to produce generalizable knowledge.…”

“…[9][10][11][12] Specific to QI projects, characteristics such as the duration of the intervention period and the type of interventions may also be relevant for determining the project's impact. 1 Measuring the scholarly impact of QI publications in neonatology and identifying project characteristics that are associated with greater impact may improve the reporting of such projects, and guide QI teams in designing projects that would be more likely to catalyze similar initiatives at other institutions. In this review, we used a systematically collected sample of recent publications to quantify the scholarly impact of manuscripts reporting QI project results in Neonatology, with the primary aim of measuring QI articles' scholarly impact.…”

“…9 10 11 12 Specific to QI projects, characteristics such as the duration of the intervention period and the type of interventions may also be relevant for determining the project's impact. 1…”

Healthcare Quality Improvement Competency: A Clinical and Training Imperative for Geropsychology

“…The QIKAT has been successfully adapted for psychiatry residents and other medical specialty residents and, thus, could be adapted for clinical geropsychologists (Reardon et al, 2011;Singh et al, 2014 Dissemination of QI work conducted in geriatric care settings, including geriatric mental health, is also valuable to the field, given the gaps in research in this population. Publication bias against QI may exist in psychology as has been documented in medicine (Jesus et al, 2018;Tumin et al, 2020). We recommend identifying journals that may be interested in publishing QI projects, including cross-disciplinary and interprofessional journals that may be an excellent fit for this type of work.…”