On Saturday November 9th, approximately 7:30 am - 1 pm. Poster presenters are assigned a one hour block during which time they will present posters. On average 4 - 5 posters judged per hour. Judging teams will meet immediately following competition for deliberations and awards will be announced during luncheon. If insufficient number of submissions received for a category, prize money may be reallocated to other categories at the SRE Subcommittee discretion.
Participants must remove exhibits from the exhibit area by 2 pm on Saturday. Unless the participant has made other arrangements with MOA, all exhibits remaining after 2 pm will be considered abandoned and will be discarded. MOA accepts no responsibility for displays left after 2 pm. Certificates will be provided for each presenting author and awards announced after judges deliberations and during luncheon. All participants welcome. Prize checks will be mailed to the winners after the convention.
By submitting an abstract and poster, you certify that (1) the research, abstract and poster are your original work or original work conducted by you and other authors; and (2) all co-authors are appropriately credited for their contributions and have been informed of the submission. Violation of these requirements will result in disqualification.
Do I need to have research or judging experience to be a judge?
No. The MOA will provide experienced judges on each judging team to help train anyone who wants to participate. Our goal is to increase participation of students, residents, fellows and practicing physicians, in addition to the research community in Michigan.
What are the time commitments?
On Saturday November 9th, you will be needed from approximately 7 am - 1 pm. Poster presenters are assigned a one hour block when they have to be present at their posters. On average you will see 4 - 5 posters per hour. Judging teams will meet immediately following for deliberations and awards will be announced.
Awards Luncheon immediately following competition, all participants welcome.
If insufficient number of submissions received for a category, prize money may be reallocated to other categories at the SRE Subcommittee discretion.
Categories
1. Basic Research:
Description: 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.
2. Clinical Research
Description: 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.
3. Clinical Vignette or Case Report
Description: 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.
4. Quality Improvement (QI), Patient Safety (PS), or High-Value Care (HVC)
Description: 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.
The SRE Committee reserves the right to reject applications and limit the number of entries.
The SRE Committee will inform applicants no later than April 15 whether their applications have been accepted for presentation at the 2018 MOA Spring Scientific Research Exhibit Competition, along with a reminder of exhibit information details.
Preparing Your Abstract Submission
Resources
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.
1. Basic Science Research Abstract Format [NEW CATEGORY]
Title – The title is a summary of the abstract itself and should convince the reader that the topic is important, relevant, and innovative.
Authors – Include name, degree and institutional affiliation. The authors included should be those who contribute significantly to the intellectual content of the research.
Introduction-Describe the context of the research objectives and explain its relevance and importance
Methods- A short paragraph providing a concise statement of the study’s basic design and methods (include IRB approval, if applicable)
Results - A brief summary of the main results along with declarations and explanations of any important findings. Authors should include the study’s relevant statistical information (e.g. confidence intervals, levels of statistical significance).
Conclusion - How does this study add to the body of knowledge on the topic? Provide a brief summary of the study's conclusions directly supported by the reported evidence. Authors may include clinical applications and any recommendations for additional study.
2. Clinical Vignette (Case Report) Abstract Format
Title – The title is a summary of the abstract itself and should convince the reader that the topic is important, relevant, and innovative.
Authors – Include name, degree and institutional affiliation. The authors included should be those who contribute significantly to the intellectual content of the case report.
Introduction - Describe the context of the case and explain its relevance and importance. Describe whether the case is unique. If not, does the case have an unusual diagnosis, prognosis, therapy or harm? Is the case an unusual presentation of a common condition? Or is the case an unusual complication of a disease or management? Describe the instructive or teaching points that add value to this case. Does it demonstrate a cost-effective approach to management or alternative diagnostic/treatment strategy? Does it increase awareness of a rare condition?
Case description – Follow the basic rules of medical communication. Report the case in sequence. Describe the history, examination and investigations adequately. Is the cause of the patient's illness clear-cut? What are other plausible explanations? Describe the treatments adequately. Have all available therapeutic options been considered? Are outcomes related to treatments? Include the patient’s progress and outcome.
Discussion – Discuss rationale for decisions that were made and the lesson from the case. Report a literature review of other similar cases. Describe how this case is different from those previously reported. Explain the rationale for reporting the case. What is unusual about the case? Does it challenge prevailing wisdom? In the future, could things be done differently in a similar case?
3. Clinical Medicine (Research Study) Abstract Format
Title - The title should reflect and concisely describe your research project.
Authors - Include authors name, degree and institutional affiliation.
Introduction/Background - Why is the topic you have selected a problem that needs to be addressed? What is missing from the field of study that your study is going to address? Provide a one-sentence summary of the rationale for the study question.
Objective(s) - What does this study intend to resolve? Provide a one-sentence description (e.g., "To determine…” or "To establish…") of the study's primary objective. Authors may choose to include key secondary objectives.
Methods - A short paragraph discussing the design, setting, patients, and interventions (Refer to judging criteria). This section describes how the study was carried out.
Design - A statement of the study's basic design (e.g, randomized controlled trial, double-blind, cohort, survey, cost-effectiveness analysis). Note: Make sure you include in the design statement a notation that the research study was approved by the IRB (institutional review board)
Setting - A one-sentence description of the clinical circumstances of the setting (eg, general community, primary care center, hospitalized care).
Patients (or other participants) – Provide a brief description of the key eligibility criteria of the study's participants. The total number of the participants must be included and how many participants were included in each group of the study (ie study group(s), control group).
Interventions—A brief description of any interventions administered. (e.g. OMM, medications, etc.)
Main Outcome Measure(s) – Provide a brief description of the study’s outcome measurements. (e.g. blood pressure, symptom scores, patient satisfaction scales)
Results - A brief summary of the main results along with declarations and explanations of any important findings. Authors should include the study’s relevant statistical information (e.g. confidence intervals, levels of statistical significance).
Conclusion - How does this study add to the body of knowledge on the topic? Provide a brief summary of the study's conclusions directly supported by the reported evidence. Authors may include clinical applications and any recommendations for additional study.
4. Quality Improvement/Patient Safety High Value Care Abstract Format [NEW CATEGORY]
Title - The title should reflect and concisely describe your project.
Authors - Include authors name, degree and institutional affiliation.
Introduction/Background: Describe - 1) where the work was completed; 2) a description of the issue that includes, if known, how long the issue has been going on and the impact the issue has on the organization, facility, or patient population; 3) what faculty, staff, patient or other groups were involved, and 4) the alignment to sponsoring organizational goals.
Aim Statement-Describe the goal of the project including numerical values that define baseline and goal.
Measures of Success -Describe how you measured your interventions to ensure adherence and describe how you measured your outcome.
Use of Quality Tools - What quality tools did you use to identify and monitor progress and solve the problem?
Interventions - What was your overall improvement plan (include interventions and identify quick wins)? How did you implement the proposed change? Who was involved in implementing the change? How did you communicate the change to all key stakeholders? What was the timeline for the change? Describe any features you feel were especially innovative.
Results - Include sample results (note if possible send sample control charts, graphs or tables as appropriate).
Conclusions and Next Steps-Describe conclusions gleaned from this project and any recommendations for future work. Describe, as applicable, how you plan to move ahead with this project.
Please read the notes and examples below to help you complete the form properly.
Note on Authorship
In general, authors for research/case presentations are typically all persons who contributed to the intellectual content of the work. You must give credit where it is due (e.g. those generating data/graphs you use), and authors must all have an understanding of the work being presented; however, for case presentations, not every physician seeing a patient throughout the course of their treatment needs to be included as authors. The first author is assumed to be the presenting author, while the subsequent authors can be presented a number of ways. In most fields of science, the last author is the principal or most senior investigator. Prior to application submission, the presenting author should contact all authors to determine if the order of authorship is important. Typically, the presenting author sends drafts of the abstract to all authors for input before it is submitted to the MOA. To promote academic integrity, the MOA notifies all authors about submissions (in case corrections are necessary).
Note on Institutional Affiliations
Authors’ institutional affiliations are generally the institution/training program/service/department where the author is supported (student or trainee) or employed (if practicing physician). It is up to each author/program how they wish to arrange their affiliations (since many training programs differ), and as such, each author must be contacted to obtain their affiliation preferences – again, this can be attained when the abstract draft is sent to all the authors.
Usually only one affiliation per author is required, though some authors participating in multiple institutions or programs may require two or more. For students, if research or a case was conducted at a particular hospital, that hospital is required to become an affiliation. If the hospital where the research/case was performed differs from your base hospital (for example, you saw the case while on an out rotation), you should also indicate your base hospital by parenthetically noting it “(Base)” after the hospital name (e.g. “Sparrow Hospital (Base), Lansing, MI”). Some examples follow (with aliases) to help guide you with how to correctly note author affiliations.
Examples:
Link: View a Case Presentation example
Link: View a Research Presentation example
Exhibit Information
You must set up your exhibit at the Amway Grand Plaza on Friday, November 16th between 2-6 pm in the Foyer located on the second level. All posters will be displayed beginning Friday evening. Judging will take place on Saturday between 7:30 am - 11:30 am. Exhibitors or their appointed representative must staff exhibit during this time to be considered for an award.
Participants must remove exhibits from the exhibit area by 2 pm on Saturday. Unless the participant has made other arrangements with MOA, all exhibits remaining after 2 pm will be considered abandoned and will be discarded by the exhibition company. MOA accepts no responsibility for displays left after 2 pm. Certificates will be provided for each presenting author and awards announced after judges deliberations. Prize checks will be mailed to winners after the convention.
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.
Whenever possible the exhibit should promote osteopathic principles as they relate to the clinical situation or scientific aspect of the display.
The concept of a research exhibit by definition means the display will be graphically interesting.
Exhibitors may use photographs; video or digital continuous closed loops, models, 3 dimensional projections, audiotapes, photomicrographs, hand drawings, etc. in the display. Information on the display must conform to legal requirements of protected health information (HIPAA compliant).
The display can be no larger than 4' x 6’. Electrical access must be pre-arranged with the MOA.
Be advised that exhibits may not be in a secured room; therefore equipment should be used only when you are present with your exhibit. The MOA is not responsible for any lost or stolen goods.
Material Provided
You are required to assemble your display; however, the MOA will provide the display board for your research presentation as well as "T" pins for hanging. One minimum wattage electric outlet will be provided by request only and must be pre-arranged with the MOA.
Materials You Bring
Use large mailing tubes for ease in transporting exhibit posters. MOA will provide "T" pins and tape, if you prefer other mounting materials, please bring your own.
Use large mailing tubes for ease in transporting exhibit posters. Display Guidelines. The following guidelines are offered to assist you with a successful presentation:
Content and Text
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.
Liability
SRE exhibitors shall assume full responsibility for damage and shall indemnify and hold harmless the MOA, and the convention venue from all liability, which may ensue from any cause whatsoever. The MOA does not guarantee or protect the exhibitors against any loss, theft, or damage of any kind. You are responsible for any personal valuable property that may be left unattended.
Contact Melissa Budd, CME Program Manager
(517) 347-1555 x 112
Melissa Budd contact form
