The present study aims to identify (1) what proportion of abstracts of clinical trials presented at The American Society for
Laser Medicine and Surgery (ASLMS) annual meetings are published as full reports, (2) time to publication, and (3) factors
that may predict the publication of research in peer-reviewed journals. Two investigators independently hand-searched all
abstracts of the ASLMS meetings to identify all reports of clinical trials. Details of sample size, the country of origin,
topic of research, type of presentation, type of laser, direction of outcome, and statistical significance were recorded for
each abstract. To determine the full publication status of each study, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials,
PubMed, and EMBASE was searched. A total of 198 abstracts were identified. Of these, 87 abstracts (44%) have been fully published.
The average time from presentation at the meeting to full publication was 57 months (95% confidence interval = 52–61), and
the estimated rate of abstracts published at 1, 2, and 4 years was 15, 30, and 38%, respectively. There is significant tendency
for being fully published in high-power laser studies, with USA as country of origin, and orally presented. Our findings supports
this opinion that conference abstracts can be an important source for systematic reviews and failure to identify trials presented
in congresses might threaten the validity of systematic reviews.
Keywords Clinical trial - Laser - Meeting abstract - Publication bias - Systematic review