VIEW 2025 POSTERS (PDFs) & WINNERS HERE

2025 SPRING SRE AWARDS  

Andrew “ANDY” Taylor Still, D.O. Award - $1500 & ANDY crystal trophy 
First Place $1000 Lawrence J. Abramson, D.O. Award (Clinical Research)
MSUCOM D.O./PhD Award $500 (Basic Research Poster)
Second Place $500 (Clinical Research)
Third Place $250 (Clinical Research)
Case Presentation $250
Honorable Mention for Osteopathic Principles $100
Honorable Mention $100

The Andrew "ANDY" Taylor Still, D.O. Achievement Award

Andrew "ANDY" Taylor Still, D.O. Achievement Award may be presented to an outstanding exhibit that reflects the principles of osteopathic medicine in research during the MOA spring conference. The ANDY Award, which includes an exquisitely carved crystal piece and a $1500 cash prize, is not awarded every year. 

ANDY AWARD WINNERS 1993-2025

2025: OMT as Treatment for Intractable Hiccups: A Case Series

Derek Bowman, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MIDr. J'Aimee Lippert has the same affiliation. Emily Jamo (OMS-3); Ethan Poland (OMS-3); Zachary Tepper (OMS-4); Canyon Obrien (OMS-4); Kayla Fong (OMS-4); Rozzie Bloch (PGY-1); Megan Kempa (PGY-1); Makenzie Kamm (OMS-2); Jack O'Hara (OMS-2); Ahmed Shahbain (OMS-2); Angela Lee Department of Osteopathic Manipulative Medicine, College of Osteopathic Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI  

2024: Mick Juarez, DO, PGY-3 - Characterization of somatic dysfunction and clinical presentation in acute concussion cases

2013: Shane R. Sergent, DO, Lorenzo Lim, Travis Gordon, Katelyn Wiseman, Becky Bajoka, John Hawkins, Kenny Briceno, M.D., Hailey Wouters, Joe Simon, Lucan Chatterley, Sophia Johnson, Nathan Lowe, Laura Favazza, Afshan Khan, Alvin Vargas, Andrew Schrotenboe, Felipe Cameroamortegui, Pam Castro, Alec Ludwig, Shaina Park, Brent Keaner, Bradley Davis, Tarana Nekzad – Transcending the International Osteopathic Identity: Cross-sectional Analysis of Osteopathic Principles and Practices in Peru.
2007: Scott Fannin, DO – Marketing a Local Osteopathic Brand via the World Wide Web
2006: Heather Lake, DO, Rob Wall, DO, Loai Marouf, DO, and Chris Buatti, DO – Guatemala Medical Research Project
1999: Lisa Vredevoogd, DO, Mark Notman, PhD, Martin Hogan, PhD, and William Johnston, DO – The Michigan Osteopathic Research Network: A Feasibility Study
1997: Rick Hallgren, PhD – Computer-controlled, interactive learning resources that are available on MSUCOM’s website
1995: Edward Loniewski, DO, Joseph Williams, DO, Anthony Bahu, DO, and Rob Schafina, DO – The Effectiveness of Osteopathic Manipulative Therapy after Hip or Knee Arthoplasty
1993: Frank Paul, DO – The Effects of Osteopathic Manipulation on Post-Op Hysterectomy

Submission Categories & Judges Scoring Rubric (printable PDFs) 

• Basic Science Research Abstract Format
• Clinical Vignette (Case Report) Abstract Format and CASE REPORT GUIDELINES 
  
• Clinical Medicine (Research Study) Abstract Format
• Quality Improvement/Patient Safety High Value Case Abstract Format

CATEGORIES

Basic Research
To improve human health, scientific discoveries must be translated into practical applications. These discoveries typically begin at the bench with basic research - in which scientists study disease at a molecular or cellular level.
Clinical Research
Patient-oriented investigations conducted with human subjects (or on material of human origin such as tissues, specimens and cognitive phenomena) for which an investigator directly interacts with human subjects. This area of research includes mechanisms of human disease; therapeutic interventions; clinical trials; development of new technologies; analysis of existing datasets; epidemiologic and behavioral studies; public or community health, or social determinants of health.
Clinical Vignette or Case Report Case Report Guidelines (printable form)
Report one or more cases that illustrate a new disease entity, or a prominent or unusual clinical feature of an established disease. It may include a summary of pertinent patient history, physical findings, laboratory data, or management description.
Quality Improvement (QI), Patient Safety (PS), or High-Value Care (HVC)
Projects or research that demonstrate the aspects of Quality Care as defined by the Institute of Medicine: Safe (injury avoidance or mitigation to patients and/or providers); timely (reduce waits and delays for patients and/or providers); effective (based on scientific knowledge, extended to all likely to benefit, while avoiding underuse and overuse); equitable (provide consistent quality, without regard to personal characteristics such as gender, ethnicity, geographic location, and socioeconomic status); efficient (avoid waste, including waste of equipment, supplies, or ideas); patient centered (respects and responds to individual patient preferences, needs, and values, ensuring patient values guide clinical decisions. High Value Care: In addition to IOM quality care definition: improving patient care through communication (aligning patient values and concerns into care plans) or advancing effectiveness of population health management.

Preparing Your Abstract Submission For a good all-around resource for preparing to submit abstracts or posters, please visit: American College of Physician’s Guide to Preparing for the Abstract Competition.

Poster Size:  Accepted poster size is 42-44 inches (width) x 36 inches (height).  There will be two (2) posters per display board. Display boards are 8 ft. (width) x 4 ft. (height). 

Abstract Text: 350-word maximum excluding title, authors, and affiliations. The research display should focus on Hypothesis or Objective, Methods, and Results of Objectives. A short and legible introduction and summary of conclusions are essential. Your presentation should contain succinct headings that organize and logically display the information. Use large print, including heavy block letters if possible. Keep the text and figure legends explicit and brief.

Graphics: Graphics should be explicit and brief. Charts, drawings, and illustrations should be similar to those you would use in making slides. Illustrations must be read from distances of about 3’ or more. Also, use color to effectively add emphasis. Ensure all illustrations are made beforehand. Do not mount your presentation materials on heavy board because they may be difficult to keep in position.

Judging Criteria: Judges will assess each exhibit on multiple criteria established by the SRE Committee consistent with generally accepted standards for competitive scientific research displays, including presentation (organization/layout), appropriate introduction/background, clear description of methods, data and analysis, thoughtful discussion and overall clarity of thought. They will judge case presentations on a unique set of weighted criteria. Displays should be readily understood with or without the author present.

The subject matter should be current and of interest to practicing clinicians. Although the committee encourages prospective studies, subject matter need not be limited to new research. Try to avoid sharing too much information in your poster, the simpler the better (biggest complaint from judges is that some posters include way too much information, and difficult to read).

Whenever possible the exhibit should promote osteopathic principles as they relate to the clinical situation or scientific aspect of the display. Andrew "ANDY" Taylor Still, D.O. Achievement Award and $1500 may be presented to an outstanding exhibit that reflects the principles of osteopathic medicine in research during the MOA spring conference. 

Materials Provided by MOA: Display boards and supplies for hanging posters such as "T" pins and tape.

Email Melissa Budd with questions!  

Spring 2024 SRE Finalists & Winners (click here) 

How Does the Judging Process Work?