Various scientific associations of biomedical specialties organize numerous scientific meetings all over the world. These meetings are an ideal occasion for specialists to exchange information and share experience, report the newest results of their investigations, as well as to become acquainted with the results and latest investigations of others. They are usually organized in attractive locations, something that additionally draws prospective participants. Having all that in mind, these meetings are, as a rule, very well attended. After the convention, however, there is usually a dilemma whether and why the presented papers should be published in a scientific journal.
The best way of presenting the results of an investigation to a wider scientific audience is a scientific paper. Presentations at scientific meetings are a less formal way of scientific communication1. Therefore, the primary significance of presenting results of investigation at scientific meetings is the advantage of delivering scientific information directly and obtaining simultaneously useful suggestions from competent experts1. The main shortcoming of presentations at meetings lies in the fact that scientific information, if presented only in this way, isn't accessible to the wider scientific audience. It is heard only by a small number of colleagues, attending the session, and it can be read in the form of an abstract, usually printed in a brochure specially prepared for the meeting. However, even the best extended abstracts, previously reviewed, cannot offer such information as a scientific paper published in a journal with an adequate peer reviewing process. This is the main reason why a paper presented at a scientific meeting should also be prepared for publishing in a relevant scientific journal, preferably in English.
The preparation of a paper for publishing, which has already been presented at a convention, demands certain efforts to conform the text to strict rules based on the definition of scientific paper2, particularly regarding detailed methodology, which defines that investigations can be repeated and conclusions tested. In contrast to the scientific paper, it is most important for the presentation at a meeting to be simple and clear, interesting to the expected audience, and deprived of all details that could distract attention from the basic point or disrupt the direct flow from the aim of investigation to the obtained results, commented only when necessary to draw an adequate conclusion.
Due to the differences between a scientific paper and its presentation at a meeting, the preparation of the manuscript for publishing should encompass all the common sections:
(1) Introduction - short introduction to the presentation, which should not last more than 1-2 minutes for a 10-minutes presentation, should be adequately enlarged to cover all the relevant aspects of the problem, define aim(s) of the investigation and state the hypothesis;
(2) Material and Method(s) - a section that is deprived of all experimental details in the presentation and trimmed down to only those necessary for understanding the idea and significance of the investigation, should be elaborated in detail, regardless of the size of the chapter, with a precise description of all the used methods so that they could be repeated by other colleagues;
(3) Results - this segment in the presentation is most similar to the corresponding section of the written paper, but it should be completed fully if it was simplified (for poster presentation), or deprived of comments (as is usual for oral presentation);
(4) Discussion - as a separate section exists only in the written form of scientific communication which, adequately interpreting the obtained results, represents a test of logic consideration4. This section can be ended with conclusions based on the objective assessment of the obtained results, or the conclusions may constitute a separate section;
(5) References - they are cited only in a written paper (although some could accompany a poster presentation), but this section implies a thorough citation of all mentioned references in previous segments. When preparing a paper for publishing, it shouldn't be overlooked that the Summary (Abstract) is a mini-version of the paper3, and presents a section that is most widely read (after the title of the paper), which is why it should be prepared with great consideration, presenting essential points for understanding the paper. Consequently, the abstract submitted to the scientific committee prior to the meeting, should be, if necessary, modified and expanded. Having in mind all the demands of a written scientific paper, the preparation of a presented paper for publishing is not a simple task and requires approximately the same efforts as if it had not been previously presented because these two forms of communication are quite different. This is probably the reason why only about 20% of the papers presented at scientific meetings undergo a publishing process in scientific journals5. There are also other possible reasons, such as: doubt that the paper would be accepted for publishing or that the results might not attract adequate attention, the absence of positive results of statistical analysis, problems with co-authorship, etc. However, the most distressing reason is that scientific meetings are sometimes more of a tourist than of a cognitive nature. Regardless of the reasons, none can have full verification: a paper presented at a scientific meeting verifies its value only when (and if) published in a relevant scientific journal (possibly in English).
REFERENCES
1. Vučković-Dekić Lj. Kako ja... saopštavam rad na naučnom skupu. Stom Glas S, 1999; 46:41-46.
2. Hall GM. Structure of a scientific paper. In: Hall GM (ed). How to write a paper. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 1994, pp 1-5.
3. Day RA. How to Write & Publish a Scientific Paper. 5th Ed. Phoenix: Oryx Press, 1998, p 29.
4. Todorović Lj. Kako ja… pišem originalni (naučni) rad. Stom Glas S, 1999; 46:117-123.
5. Weber EJ, Callham ML, Wears RL. Unpublished Research From a Medical Specialty Meeting. JAMA, 1998; 280:257-259.