On the evaluation of scientific papers presented in IAPS conferences.

Citation metadata

Date: July-Sep 2021
Publisher: Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd.
Document Type: Conference news
Length: 1,100 words
Lexile Measure: 1300L

Document controls

Main content

Article Preview :

Byline: Venkatachalam. Raveenthiran


With great interest, I read the article by Drs Murthi and Mukkavilli.[1] Periodic qualitative auditing of the scientific papers presented in IAPS conferences is highly desirable. It is the only way of improving our research standards. I published a similar but methodologically more robust analysis almost a decade ago.[2] Unfortunately, the present authors have made no reference to the previous work. Probably because of that, they adopted a very different methodology to evaluate the scientific papers presented between 2014 and 2018. Thus, the two papers become uncomparable and the golden opportunity of evaluating if we have improved overtime or not, is lost. The present study is a retrospective review, while the previous study was a prospective observational study. Perhaps due to the limitations of a retrospective study, the authors could not comment on the scientific value of discussions, the relevance of conclusions, and the quality of audience interaction. The authors have taken 4 consecutive years (2014-2018) for analysis. Instead, restricting it to a particular year would have enabled more focused analysis. Similarly, posters and oral presentations cannot be mixed-up together because of their different purpose, format, and impact. The authors could have easily evaluated the papers for their level of evidence. Although they mention it in the discussion section, their data do not reflect anything on the analysis of the Oxford level of evidence. Finally, authors have only provided descriptive data rather than statistical analysis, facilitating the synthesis of conclusions. Hence, the phrase 'qualitative evaluation' in the title could possibly be misleading and it would have been appropriate had it been 'quantitative study.' I wish, future researches adopt a standard methodology...

Source Citation

Source Citation   

Gale Document Number: GALE|A662728835