Scholarly Communication and Concerns for Our Conferences

By Lannin, Natasha; Gustafsson, Louise et al. | British Journal of Occupational Therapy, April 2009 | Go to article overview

Scholarly Communication and Concerns for Our Conferences

Lannin, Natasha, Gustafsson, Louise, Cusick, Anne, Walker, Marion, Steultjens, Esther, Fricke, Janet, Turton, Ailie, Logan, Pip, Aas, Randi Wago, Froude, Elspeth, McCluskey, Annie, Drummond, Avril, Corr, Susan, Fletcher-Smith, Joanna, Radford, Kate, Pinnington, Lorraine, Novak, Iona, Wallen, Margaret, British Journal of Occupational Therapy

An open letter to our colleagues:

We write to express concern about the process of reviewing abstracts for occupational therapy scientific conferences and the rate of rejection of high-quality, internationally well-regarded research studies at occupational therapy conferences of both national and World Federation of Occupational Therapists' (WFOT's) events over the past 5 years. The cosignatories of this letter acknowledge that this journal does not have a direct link with association or WFOT conferences. In expressing our concerns, we also recognise the relationship between research and practice and that researchers have a responsibility to present results with clear clinical implications. However, the current trend is that this platform for communication of research results is not readily available.

In 2003, a number of clinical trials were rejected or allocated to poster presentation for Australian conferences. In 2006, the WFOT Scientific Committee rejected a number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews from leading occupational therapy researchers, prompting telephone calls, letters of complaint and requests for reappraisal. The then editor of the Australian Occupational Therapy Journal wrote a letter of concern to OT AUSTRALIA regarding this occurrence. This trend is not specific to Australia as the recent conferences from COTEC (Council of Occupational Therapists for the European Countries) in Athens (2004) and Hamburg (2008) rejected presentations of high quality RCTs (published in international scientific journals of high scientific impact) while presentations of interventions based on opinion-level evidence were accepted.

As members of our countries' professional associations and of WFOT, we are extremely concerned that our professional conferences do not promote the inclusion of presentations which provide high levels of evidence and quality of studies. There is common bemoaning by colleagues that there are limited RCTs to support our occupational therapy interventions, and yet, when such trials are submitted for presentation to our conferences, they have not been accepted.

We have all been involved in the review of abstracts for conference programmes and realise that the task of the Scientific Programme Committee is difficult. However, it is essential that careful consideration is given to the review process. There are important ramifications if the Scientific Review of papers is not correct. This was apparent at the recent national OT AUSTRALIA conference (2008) and highlighted that the current procedure for review of abstracts, including a lack of a written policy on this process, is to the detriment of our profession.

We write to ask the profession to advocate strongly for WFOT and its member associations to adopt a new Scientific Review Policy for both national and international occupational therapy conferences, and that such a policy is developed with wide consultation and leadership from all aspects of our professional community, including both clinicians and academics. In requesting this, we are aware that there is both research and procedures adopted by other health professions available to our profession which we believe could be used to guide where WFOT should now head.

Much research has been conducted on the issue of scientific review of abstracts for conferences, with results concluding:

* Blinded review of abstracts remains important; however, it must be accepted that blinding to author and institution identity does not improve the amount of variability in scores between abstract reviewers (Smith et al 2002). In fact, the effect of blinding creates, at best, a perception of objectivity but not objectivity in and of itself.

* Positive-outcome bias remains an issue (that is, negative findings studies are unlikely to be accepted to conferences) which is not related to study design or quality (Callaham et al 1998). …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25,

Note: primary sources have slightly different requirements for citation. Please see these guidelines for more information.

Cited article

Scholarly Communication and Concerns for Our Conferences


Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25,

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search


    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.