Are there any standard guidelines or statements for evaluating quality of abstracts in order for scientific committees to select type of presentation (i.e plenary session, oral session, poster or published abstract) in a biomedical congress?
The definitive guideline for what abstracts for clinical trials should contain can be found at http://www.consort-statement.org/extensions/data/abstracts/.
The STROBE Guideline is useful for observational studies: http://www.strobe-statement.org/fileadmin/Strobe/uploads/checklists/STROBE_checklist_conference_abstract_DRAFT.pdf
For other types of guidelines, check out the "Equator" network (http://www.equator-network.org/home/).
I am not quite conversant with the guidelines for scientific articles but I believe a good abstract should be structured according to the specifications of the journal editors, it should have objectives, address specific problem/issue, discuss methods, results and conclusion.
Check biomedical journals for details.
The Standard Format of Abstracts in Biomedicine is "IMRAD". It is abbreviation of Introduction, Method, Results, And Discussion and conclusion.
I agree with Kathryn Nelson Emily. There are many guidelines for good reporting of biomedical research studies for all types of studies. for example, CONSORT Guideline for treatment papers, STARD for diagnostic papers, STROBE for observational studies, COREQ for qualitative research, ARRIVE for animal studies, PRISMA for Reporting of Systematic review and Meta-analysis of Clinical Trials, and MOOSE a proposal for reporting of Meta-analysis of observational studies.
Please check (http://www.equator-network.org/).
Best Regards.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education
- Higher Education
- Academic Writing