Differences Between Publishing an Abstract, Poster, and Full Article in Medical Research
Abstracts are condensed summaries typically prepared with the least care despite being the most-read section, posters are visual presentations at conferences, and full articles are comprehensive peer-reviewed publications that contain detailed methodology and complete data—with abstracts and posters serving primarily as preliminary dissemination vehicles that often contain significant inaccuracies compared to full reports. 1
Key Distinctions
Abstracts
- Purpose and Format: Abstracts serve to guide readers to seek more information about trials and aid in decision-making, especially when full reports cannot be accessed 1
- Quality Concerns: Despite being the most-read section in publications, abstracts are usually prepared with the least care 1
- Accuracy Problems:
- 75% of abstracts had at least one deficiency when compared to full trial reports 1
- 24% of conference abstracts presented different sample sizes and 41% had different treatment-effect estimates compared with full reports 1
- 16% differed in defining primary outcomes, 54% differed in number of participants randomized, and 78% differed in number analyzed 1
- "Spin Problem": 38% of Results sections and 58% of Conclusions sections in abstracts demonstrated "spin"—defined as overinterpretation attempting to show significant results despite clearly non-significant findings for primary outcomes 1
Posters
- Conference Presentations: Posters are visual displays presented at scientific meetings, representing an intermediate form of dissemination between abstracts and full publications 1
- Timing Issues: Conference abstracts often report interim analyses more frequently than full publications 1
- Inconsistency Risk: A longer time between conference abstracts and full reports being published significantly increases the likelihood of inconsistency, as extended study duration allows more data collection 1
Full Articles
- Comprehensive Reporting: Full articles contain detailed information in main texts including complete methodology, statistical analyses, and all outcomes 1
- Peer Review: Full reports undergo rigorous peer review and copyediting processes 1
- Primary Publication Priority: Publication plans should prioritize the primary publication (reporting prespecified primary endpoints) over any secondary publications 1
Critical Pitfalls and Clinical Implications
Reporting Inconsistencies
- Major discrepancies exist between trial protocols/registrations and corresponding full trial reports across various fields, including outcome measures, subgroup analyses, and statistical analyses 1
- Results not statistically significant for primary outcomes are significantly associated with more inconsistencies 1
- Authors need to explain protocol modifications that occur during trial conduct to avoid perceived discrepancies 1
Practical Recommendations for Clinicians
- Be cautious when relying solely on abstracts for clinical decision-making, as they frequently contain inaccuracies and spin 1
- Verify critical data by accessing full reports whenever possible, particularly for primary outcomes and adverse events 1
- Pay particular attention to the wording of conclusions or interpretations of findings in abstracts, as these are most prone to spin 1
- Check trial registration numbers when provided, as this allows verification of originally planned outcomes versus reported outcomes 1
For Researchers and Authors
- Follow CONSORT extension guidelines for reporting trial abstracts 1
- Carefully check abstracts to ensure accuracy and consistency with full report findings 1
- Provide details and explanations of changes between conference abstracts and full reports 1
- Strict copyediting and proofreading should be conducted to improve consistency of abstract reporting 1