November 2, 2015Reg Sauve

Abstracts• Why do them, how to do them and what happens

after you prepare and submit them?

Posters• General comments and definitions, poster

content and style, preparation.

10 minute platform presentations• How to prepare them and how to present them?

An abstract is an information digest of 250 to 350 words. It is an original document rather than an excerpted passage.

It may be:• part of a manuscript,

• a published description of an oral or poster presentation,

• part of a research proposal.

Varies with type of manuscript Usually one paragraph, no tables or

figures Does not include anything not in the

paper Concise writing style Usually done in present tense When should you prepare it?

Often, reviewers receive the title and abstract when asked if they will review a submitted manuscript

They will vary to some extent with the journal so always check “instructions for authors”

Avoid abbreviations and references Try to keep to simple word order and

word combinations

Doesn’t accompany a paper Distributed ahead of time for peer review

and at the conference, to help the audience decide which session to attend

Usually one paragraph May include figures or tables (but

remember how much space they take up)

Usually emphasize method and implications

Accompanies the proposal Similar to those in manuscripts but

must “grab the readers attention” Nothing can be in the abstract that is

not in the proposal Should be done in “reader friendly

language”.

Language level aimed at a bright, educated but not specific research-trained person

Main messages• Lessons decision-makers can take away

• To prepare them set aside your text and focus on clear messages from your study

• Consider your audience – who are they? What do they want to know from your work?

May be provided by the editor Use existing “Rules of authorship”

such as those from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Certain study designs have published “Rules of Reporting” such as PRISMA , MOOSE and CONSORT.

PRISMA• Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic

Reviews and Meta-analyses MOOSE

• Meta-analyses and Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies

CONSORT• Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials

Generally preferred over narrative abstracts

Headings vary according to the specific journal or meeting’s specifications

They permit readers to do efficient and accurate appraisal

Convenient to a reader whether planning clinical practice, writing a literature review, abstracting the article etc

They force the author to be explicit Indexing (*part of the grey literature)

Introduction (or Background) Objective Methods Results Discussion

• Not a repeat of info from other sections

The title is the first (and sometimes the ONLY) glimpse an audience will have of your work

It should give an idea of the purpose and scope of the project

Ask yourself:› For whom am I writing?

› What message do I want to convey?

› Why now? What is the topical angle?

This should only be 1-2 sentences describing why you did the study

Sometimes the key part of the introduction is the main objective or question of the study and the main hypothesis tested

Study design Setting Patients and participants Interventions (if any) Main outcome measures

A key item is the type of study – clinical trial, cohort, case control, case series, quasi-experimental design, etc.

Indicate whether prospective or retrospective

RCTs have specific reporting requirements (including approach to randomization, blinding, allocation etc.)

This section should include key points such as the geographical base or centre, the level of care in the centre, if appropriate, etc.

Selection procedures, key entry criteria, exclusion criteria, numbers of participants starting and finishing the study

A tree diagram often works best

Focus on the primary outcome measures that were planned before the study began

What was found? Sometimes there is confusion re what goes

into results and what goes into methods. You can present the most important results

first, or go from simple to complex results, or present them chronologically.

Do not interpret any results in this section. Exclude irrelevant findings but never omit

valid results that contradict your hypothesis.

Include only conclusions directly supported by the data

You can also include the implications (e.g. clinical applications)

General comments Audience Poster content Style Preparation Presentation

Posters are well-accepted means of scientific communication.

Preparation involves similar steps to a journal article, but the scale is much less

A poster should be a “well designed, eye catching and engaging display of research or scientific communication”.

It needs to catch and hold the attention of the passer-by long enough to implant a significant idea in his or her mind.

Allows for question-answer and the exchange of ideas regarding your research

Less confrontational venues for first-time presenters

Can be re-used More people can see the poster than

can attend oral presentations

Time and effort required to prepare them – preparing a poster will take as much time as you let it

Transportation to meeting? Not easily changed at the last minute Some colors or patterns look great on

a computer screen but don’t work on posters

Traditional poster presentations Poster symposium Topic-specific “poster tours” Most people walking past your poster

will, at best, simply skim read the title; others will read selected sections; very few read it completely

Colleagues who know you and your work; they provide company but usually not critical review

Workers in the same area; this is probably the most valuable part of the audience

Those working in other areas; they may be interested but usually don’t provide critical review

A paper presents all of the important information about your research – a poster presents only the most important information

In a poster, you are presenting only the basics – your audience is not trying to replicate your study at this point. They just want to understand the basic experimental design and findings.

The title of your poster should be readable from 20 feet

Use a relatively standard format with the title at the top to help quickly orient the audience reading your work

The title should be in capital letters; it is suggested that 8 words is the most suitable length for a title

If space permits, use first names to facilitate interactions – middle initials, degrees (if >1) and titles are usually not necessary

Order of authors?

The “rules” are the same as with writing a paper – each author should be able to justify his/her name on the poster by their role in designing, carrying out, interpreting or writing up the research.

Presenter first? Most senior person – first or last?

Some conference organizers ask that it be included on the poster in the right (or left) corner

It may help to orient the audience but it may take up too much room and is rarely read

It is a good idea to have printed copies with your contact information included, to hand out to people who want them

Generally, you don’t need abstracts on posters

Should justify the study and list the objectives or conclusions

Some of the audience will read the title and then only if they think it is warranted they will read the introduction then if they think it is warranted they will move to the results and conclusions

Should explain the basics of the procedures you used

Should also state and justify key assumptions so your results can be viewed in the proper context

Usually this section is quite short. You are showing colleagues what you have done – not how they can repeat it.

Usually the main part of any poster It is suggested that you emphasize

only major points of your results

Always include a conclusion section Usually quite short Briefly points out what you found and

its importance, parallels and discrepancies with previous research and theory

Often points out future research possibilities

Often includes a speculation section

Usually specified by the conference organizers

A default dimension for poster boards is 4’ x 6’; the actual poster should be around 3’ x 4’

Do a rough sketch of your poster When in doubt, edit it out – crowded,

cluttered posters are difficult to read and hence they are often disregarded; make sure every item in the poster is necessary

Use blank spaces to highlight or offset information

There should be a logical progression in the way the material is organized

It is better to do a vertical or a horizontal design rather than a combination

If possible, use a mixture of words and visuals

Headings should be in the same font, style and position throughout the poster

Colours should be used only to emphasize and differentiate information and add interest

Keep the background light The foreground colour should have

high contrast and complement the background

It is hard to read a poster entirely done in capital letters

Do not use more than two font types; too many font types are distracting

Use sans serif fonts; Arial or Times New Roman are most common

If you use bold or italicized print for emphasis, underlining becomes “overkill”

Make sure line graphs are thick enough to be seen from a distance and don’t use over 4 lines

Instead of using lines of different thicknesses, use contrasting coloured lines or different line styles to distinguish between lines on multi-line graphs

Keep colours and symbols constant if more than one variable is used

Does the degree to which a presenter’s attire co-ordinates with the poster influence the numbers of visitors to that poster?• Keegan DA, Bannister SL. CMAJ 2003;

169:1291-2.

Critique vs criticism Graphic design and scientific inquiry

require different skills but often, the best designed posters are also those with the best science

Basics• Are all required sections present?• Does it conform to the conference where it

will be presented?• Are the font size and type appropriate and

consistent?• Spelling and grammar correct?• Content is appropriate and relevant for the

audience

Design• Can all text be easily read from 4 feet away?• Is the flow of the poster easy to follow?• Is the white space used well?• Are bullet points used in place of text

whenever possible?• Are all images relevant and necessary?• Are the background and text colours good

for easy reading• Are images clear?

Content• Is the story of the poster clear?• Is the title clear and informative of the project?• Is the research question clear?• Are the objectives stated? • Are implications to practice mentioned? • Is all content relevant and on key points• Is the content duplicated in text and graphics?

Oral presentation of poster?

Capture audience attention at once Clarify your main objective Minimize detail Use short sentences without

subordinate clauses Simple slides

Why you did the work?• Avoid saying “nothing is known…………”

How you went about it? What resulted? So what?

In a talk >20 minutes, the audience should be told what the structure is going to be. In a shorter talk, there is no time for this; it should be obvious from the talk itself.

Aim to talk a bit shorter than the allotted time to avoid the need to double your presentation speed near the end – you could lose your message if you do that.

Makes sure what you want to say really can be done in 10 minutes.

Allows you to:› Check the logical development

› Ensure sentences are short

› Select vigorous verbs

› Drop inessential items

› Devise lively phrases

› Allocate balanced time to various sections

Title each slide (if audience attention wanders, they can still catch up)

Make only one major point on each slide

List your slide titles to make sure they make a logical sequence

Plan to show slides for not over 80% of your time at 1 minute per slide – more than 8 slides in a 10 minute talk is too many!

Try to fit material in a rectangle with the long side across

Use colours for emphasis

Put arrows on micrographs to show points of interest

Don’t use illegibly small type

Don’t use poor quality prints plus an apology

Don’t make slides from poorly printed copy

Communication works best if there is eye contact

Make your slides so that they prompt the next statement

Topic outlines on index cards You shouldn’t have to read your talk

ALWAYS REHEARSE to make sure:• The timing is right

• There are no inadvertent tongue-twisters

• The sentences are short and clear

• There are not long periods without slides followed by a burst of several slides in succession

Most people try to dress slightly more formally than the audience

Check the slides(or PowerPoint), notes and full text are with you

Locate the pointer, microphone and remote-control buttons ahead of time

Be attentive to the site of the microphone

Adopt a relaxed but not sloppy stance Start with a smile then launch into

your talk – don’t begin with extensive acknowledgements of your co-workers etc. They can be on a slide or in the program.

Don’t talk to the screen If there is a mishap, pass it off with an

unrehearsed quip – the audience may laugh sympathetically to further relax you.

Never apologize – if your slides are poor you shouldn’t have shown them. If you didn’t finish your talk you should have! If your study didn’t live up to your expectations present what facts you have and draw what conclusions you can. A pointless talk with an apology is a waste of the audience’s time

Show each slide long enough to demonstrate its significance

Don’t read aloud every word on the slide

At the end, turn to the chairperson to signal you have finished. You can say thank you but don’t ask for questions – that is the chairperson’s perogative.