Aims:To determine the quality of reporting in the proceedings of the All India Ophthalmological Conference
(AIOC) 2000, subsequent rate of publication in an indexed journal and differences between the proceedings
and the journal version of these papers.Design:Observational study.Materials and Methods:All papers presented at the AIOC 2000 were retrieved from the proceedings and
assessed for completeness of reporting. To determine the subsequent full publication, a Medline search
was performed as of January 2007; consistency between the proceedings paper and the final publication
was evaluated. Statistical analysis: Chi square and Fisher′s exact tests were used to compare publication
rates based on geographical location, subspecialty and study design; Student′s t-test was used to compare
differences based on the number of authors and sample size.Results:Two hundred papers were retrieved; many failed to include study dates, design or statistical methods
employed. Thirty-three (16.5%) papers were subsequently published in indexed journals by January 2007. The
published version differed from the proceedings paper in 27 (81.8%) instances, mostly relating to changes in
author name, number or sequence.Conclusions:The overall quality of reporting of scientific papers in the proceedings of the AIOC 2000 was
inadequate and many did not result in publication in an indexed journal. Differences between the published
paper in journals and in proceedings were seen in several instances. Ophthalmologists should be cautious
about using the information provided in conference proceedings in their ophthalmic practice.