Your abstract can be accepted as poster display, poster walk, poster presentation or oral presentation:
All the posters presenters, who received the acceptance email stating that “Your abstract has been accepted as poster display”, should upload an electronic poster as per the instructions below.
Please note there is no presentation for posters.
All the poster presenters, who received the acceptance email stating that “Your abstract has been accepted for a poster walk”, are kindly requested to check the poster station N° on the final version of the programme on site. The poster walks will take place in the poster area on the 15th, 16th and 18th of September from 08.00 to 09.00. The Poster should be prepared following the instructions below. A .ppt presentation is not necessary.
All the posters presenters who received the acceptance email stating that “Your abstract has been accepted for a poster presentation” are kindly requested to check the date, time and hall name in the scientific programme.
Poster presenters are requested to upload an electronic version of their abstract as per the instructions below.
The presentation time is 5 minutes in total (2 minutes for presentation and 3 minutes for discussion)
We kindly ask you to prepare a presentation with 2 slides only on a USB key with the following name of the file: “PosterPresentation_lastname_time”. The file should be brought to the slide centre one day before the presentation.
Your presentation will consist of two parts:
- The poster itself (uploaded as the instructions above)
- Presentation during a poster session (2 slides – 2 minutes of presentation + 3 minutes of discussion)
All oral presenters are kindly requested to check the date, time and hall name of their presentation in the scientific programme.
The presentation time is 15 minutes in total (10 minutes of presentation and 5 of discussion).
We kindly ask you to prepare a presentation with 5 slides only on a USB key with the following name of the file: “OralPresentation_lastname_time”. The file should be brought to the slide centre one day before the presentation.
Electronic Poster Instructions
After you have been given the link for poster upload, please follow the instruction given below to prepare your electronic poster:
Accepted file format for submission: .PDF
We recommend traditional vertical format (A4).
File size: we suggest max 20 MB
Please consider that the file will be opened with a viewer that fits the scale of the display screen, independently from the screen dimension you have chosen. Therefore, the format is most important than the absolute measure. Different sizes will be anyway visualised, but they cannot appear to fit with the entire display monitor.
The maximum allowed size is 2.160 pixels x 3.840, with a minimum resolution of 72 dpi. The upload is limited to files having 20 Mb maximum, excluding the video files (we suggest A4 format).
One-page posters are the simplest option, but consider that a multipage file is supported. In this case, it is recommended to limit your poster to no more than 3-4 pages.
Audio comment – MP3 File
Accepted file format for submission: .MP3
Duration: 1-2 min
File size: Max 10 MB
In addition to the poster file, during submission, you can also attach your audio comment. We suggest 1 or 2 minutes speech max. A headset will be available to hear your audio comment on-site during free-time slots.
The maximum size for audio files to be uploaded is 10 Mb.
The scientific committee consists of the ESPR/EBN council, the UENPS council and, for the process, od secretariat representatives.
LIST OF TOPICS
The list of topics for each of the jENS sections + ‘other’ topics to cover new ground is reviewed and revised. Oral parallel sessions are planned for topics where a sufficient number of good abstracts are expected. The choice of keynote speakers depends on the list of topics which must be decided before invitations are sent out.
The councils of the ESPR/EBN and UENPS always serve as reviewers. The section secretaries expecting many abstracts may engage more people. Each reviewer is expected to review 50 abstracts, and each abstract must be reviewed by at least 3 reviewers. Reviewers must confirm that they will do the reviews in the allocated time period.
Reviewers score their allotted abstracts (see scoring system below) without knowing the authors or institutions and without knowing the scores of others. Reviewers indicate if they consider the abstract to be less relevant for the topic. Section secretaries oversee the review process of their topics, and the chairman oversees the review of the remaining topics.
WHEN ALL SCORES ARE AVAILABLE
The top-20 scoring abstracts that were submitted by young investigators for the prize, and the top-10 scoring abstracts submitted for the Bengt Roberston Award are re-scored by the scientific committee.
ABSTRACT ACCEPTANCE AND PROGRAMME SETTING
At the programme meeting, one printed copy of each abstract is available. Abstracts are on separate sheets of paper and grouped by topics. The meeting programme with open abstract slots in the parallel oral sessions and parallel poster sessions is available on the web for simultaneous use during the programme meeting.
The committee discusses the lowest scoring abstracts. Abstracts that are of no general interest either regarding question, methodology, or results are rejected.
The abstract for the Bengt Robertson Award is selected.
The six abstracts for the young investigator prize section are selected.
Abstracts indicated as potentially misplaced in topic are moved to other topics if more relevant, or to an ‘open’ group
The Abstracts are distributed into meaningful groups and sequences. The priority is to allow the audience to understand the scientific issues as deeply as possible and to maximise the exchange of experience and views. Since oral parallel sessions generally have a greater audience (fewer parallels), abstracts with broader interest is preferentially used for oral sessions. This work is led by the section secretaries and the chairman for their respective topics in parallel groups. Some exchange of abstract may take place to optimise the building of meaningful contexts and the abstract from the ‘open’ group is also considered.
Abstracts that cannot fit into a context in the programme can be rejected at this time as decided by the committee.
When all abstracts for a session has been selected, and the optimal sequence has been determined the paper are clipped together and a session title is coined. Finally, the session title and abstract numbers are typed into the conference program.
Abstract numbers in the programme are cross-checked against the abstract database to make sure that all abstracts have been processed.
The poster sessions are distributed on the available time slots.
Presenting author names are cross-checked for time conflicts and abstracts or sessions are moved as necessary and possible, or authors are informed.
AFFILIATIONS AND AUTHORS OF THE ABSTRACTS WILL BE ANONYMOUS DURING THE REVIEWING PROCESS
Abstract scores (from 1 to 5; x and COI):
- Unintelligible or without general interest as regards either question, methodology, or results, e.g. a case report or case series without a special analysis or interpretation. Why report it?
- Studies without a clear question or special analysis or interpretation. Why was done?
- Well-motivated experiment, trial, epidemiological investigation, or other observation, but inconclusive by methodological weakness or lack of statistical power. A fair try.
- High standard work with firm and well-founded conclusions. A clear hit.
- High standard work. Highly relevant: High impact results, or by breaking new ground by question or methodology. A smash!
COI: Conflicts of interest, not evaluated.