Guidelines for abstract submission for upcoming conference 2023

The planning, submission, and presentation of an abstract are significant steps in the research process that have numerous advantages for the researcher and author. The main focus of writing an abstract is addressing the question, “Why did you start?” What were you up to? What did you discover, and what does it all mean? The process of getting ready to write the abstract can be streamlined with a few useful stages. The steps are discussed in this article, along with advice on how to write each of the components of an abstract (the title, author list, introduction, methods, results, and conclusions); the benefits and drawbacks of including a table or figure in the abstract; a few general writing tips; and three annotated examples of well-written abstracts from original studies, method/device evaluations, and case reports.

• In The Context Of Presenting An Abstract At A Conference In 2023
  • An abstract’s creation, submission (in accordance with the abstract submission format of the conference that you plan on presenting your research at), and presentation are critical phases in the life of a research effort.

• Most studies go through these stages, though not all do. 
• The process of drafting and presenting an abstract has a number of benefits beyond just creating a manuscript and submitting it for publication when the study is over. 
• By forcing the researcher or author to focus on the most crucial elements of the study’s objective, design, findings, and consequences, it forces concentration and helps the writer’s perspective on the topic become more clear. 
• By requiring a succinct summary of the data, it advances the project toward completion of the whole manuscript, which intimidates many beginning writers. 
• Assembling the results for inclusion in a poster also makes it easier to choose how to present and interpret the results. 
• Peer review is applied to the author’s work, although briefly.

• The only practical way for many researchers to get approval and/or institutional support for attending a significant professional meeting is to have an abstract on the program. 
• The findings are communicated earlier than is often achievable with complete peer-reviewed paper publishing, hastening the advancement of knowledge and practice. 
• This is especially essential for the work itself. 
• Furthermore, sharing the project and its results with peers at the meeting almost always results in new ideas, inquiries, and interpretations that influence and enhance the final paper.

• However, in order for the abstract to be accepted for presentation at the meeting, it must be appropriately and expertly prepared. 
• This page explains the elements of an abstract, provides helpful advice on how to improve the message and impact of each element and includes general guidance on how to prepare an abstract as well as pointers for raising the possibility that one’s abstract will be approved. 
• This blog is mostly intended for people who are creating and submitting (offering some insight into how to publish papers in Scopus journals as well) abstracts for the first time, while experienced abstract writers may find some useful information in it as well.

• Many of the points made in this blog apply to creating abstracts for scientific conferences of all sorts. 
• Although equipment reviews and case reports are also discussed because the Open Forum accepts abstracts of both types of studies in addition to more conventional ones, the majority of the conversation focuses on papers detailing research studies.

• What Exactly Is An Abstract?
  • A scientific paper’s complete abstract is a shortened version of the study. 
  • It outlines a study and its findings. 
  • It is a way of explaining to one’s peers what was done, why it was done, what was discovered, and what the ramifications are. 
  • An abstract can only be a “bare bones” summary of all the study’s information because it is highly constrained in terms of both the words it can contain and the amount of space it can take up on a page. 
  • On the other hand, based only on the content of the abstract, both the selection committee and meeting participants must determine whether to accept the abstract and whether to attend the session at which it is delivered.
  • Therefore, there must be sufficient “meat”, particularly in the methods and results sections, to convey the study’s main point.

• Abstracts for scientific articles resemble but differ from abstracts for presentation at meetings. 
• Depending on the needs of the society or the international conference 2023, the format could be varied. 
• Compared to article abstracts, meeting abstracts often permit more wide and unrestricted use of abbreviations and may include references, tables, or figures. 
• Electronic search engines make it possible to access the abstracts of publications that have already been published. 
• Even though conference abstracts are frequently published, either as supplements to or in regular issues of the host society’s journals, most online search engines have not indexed them.

• The fact that an abstract was included in a professional society’s conference’s proceedings does not imply that the society approves or otherwise supports the study the abstract discusses. 
• Despite the fact that many abstracts are published and can therefore be used as references in scientific articles, they are significantly less valuable than full peer-reviewed reports and should never be seen as being similar. 
• They belong in a different area of the author’s curriculum vitae because they are not “publications” in the same way as comprehensive reports. 
• Some scientific journals do not permit the citation of abstracts in the reports they publish, and the majority of fast Scopus journals and publications at least forbid doing so.

• A full manuscript’s publication in a peer-reviewed journal is necessary for the project’s completion, which cannot be achieved by publishing an abstract. 
• In reality, the majority of abstracts presented never receive complete publications. 
• For instance, less than half of all the research abstracts submitted at over two hundred biomedical events in the span of three decades were ultimately published as full papers, according to a recent study. 
• Although the percentage of open forum abstracts that are ultimately published has not been explicitly calculated, it is believed to be far lower than half. 
• The most disappointing of the numerous potential causes is when the researcher or author neglects to compile and submit a complete manuscript of a publishable work.

• Getting Ready To Write The Abstract
  • The relative challenge of clearly and simply conveying complex material has to be considered. 
  • If you want a 10-minute summary, a research author can probably have it ready in a week; if you want it to be 30 minutes, it can be done in a day.

• One of the activities is writing an abstract. 
• There aren’t many messages whose essence can’t be condensed into a quick presentation, but doing so successfully demands clear thinking, meticulous planning, and succinct, effective delivery. 
• Writing the abstract shouldn’t wait until the day before the last day for submission because it takes time to put together a decent, polished one. 
• This is especially crucial for novice writers, who will gain by discussing the idea and reviewing rough draughts with a more seasoned author.
• There should be enough time given so that each author named can contribute to the abstract and approve the final version.
• A research abstract’s objectives are to express in a condensed form what should be said in a scientific paper –
  • How did you get started?
  • How did you act?
  • What did you discover?
  • What does it signify? 
• The introduction (or background) is covered by the first of these questions, the methods section by the second, the findings by the third, and the conclusions by the fourth. 
• Nothing more than succinct, clear responses to those queries should be included in an abstract.
• A study should typically be provided in a single abstract. 
• There are valid exceptions, like when a complex clinical study’s design and methods are presented at one meeting while the results are presented at a subsequent conference or when two different aspects of the study are presented (like the overall initial results and then the complications or subsequent follow-up), especially if these are appropriate for different audiences. 
• Although it is all too common, trying to fit as many individual presentations into a single project as feasible by employing the “LPU” (“least publishable unit”) strategy is the publishing industry’s version of environmental pollution.
• Any short-term advantage for the individual researcher comes at the expense of the larger scientific community, for which managing an ever-growing amount of new data is a barrier to advancement.
• Abstracts that have already been delivered should not be revised for submission to new meetings. 
• The identical abstract may be presented at a local, regional, and national meeting twice but not at more than one national meeting, even to the same society or audience.
• Even though a complete paper may have already been submitted, the abstract’s substance shouldn’t have been made public before the conference.
• Reading the instructions is the first step in drafting an abstract. 
• Although there are some commonalities among them all, professional groups almost always provide criteria and specifications for submitting abstracts to their meetings. 
• Many well-known scientific journals’ websites have instructions for writing an abstract for the open forum that are explicit and in-depth. 
• There are forms that the abstract must be printed on for various meetings.
• One of the very last phases in the procedure is printing the final abstract on this form. 
• The form should be duplicated for working draughts, with the original kept for the “final final” edition upon completion of all rewrites, copyedits, and corrections.
• It could be beneficial for first-time abstract authors, in particular, to browse through the published abstracts from the most recent annual meeting. 
• This makes it easier to understand the ideas covered in this article and to have a sense of what a quality abstract looks like. 
• Additionally, there are a number of published instructions for creating abstracts. 
• However, they vary in their focus and intended audience.

• Thinking About What The Title Of The Abstract Should Be
  • The abstract’s title should accurately describe what it will include. 
  • It ought to make as much of the study’s context and objectives clear as possible.
  • Additionally, a title for an abstract works best when it alludes to its main “take-home message.” 
  • It should be roughly ten to twelve words long and include the purpose, design, and range of the investigation. 
  • In general, it is preferable to describe the subject of the investigation in the title rather than stating the findings or conclusions. 
  • Studies of published research papers with names that summarised their findings (“3D Printed Prosthetic Limbs Offer Less Traction Over Conventional Ones”) have discovered that the vast majority of these findings were wrong and overstepped the implications of their data.

• The title of the abstract should not contain jargon or strange acronyms and should be simple enough for all readers to understand. 
• Key study design elements can be included (“A Survey of Department Managers’ Attitudes on…”) but generalizations like “A Study of” or “An Investigation Into” are unnecessary and should be avoided. 
• Word games and cutesy or purposefully provocative terms grab the reader’s interest, but they rarely hold up over time and can be seen as trivializing the important task being reported.

• Understanding How Organizational & Author Hierarchies Work
  • Only those people who actually carried out the study – whose ideas, designs, data collection, analysis, and writing of the abstract—should be listed as authors. 
  • With the exception of the senior author (the mentor), who is frequently put last, author lists are rough rank orders of the relative contributions of the people cited. 
  • The author who conceptualized the study and contributed the most creatively to the project is typically the one mentioned first.

• With very few exceptions, this should be the individual who, if the abstract is accepted, will deliver the poster or slide presentation. 
• It is preferable to utilize professional qualifications and full names (e.g., Elwood T. Smith RRT) rather than nicknames and regional work titles (e.g., Corky Smith RCP). 
• Only affiliations pertinent to the study – typically, the department and organization where the work was done—should be listed.

• Authors’ and academics’ business relationships are increasingly being scrutinized, and rightfully so.
• Devices and equipment are important to our discipline, and it is totally normal for studies to be financed by industry or for researchers with connections to industry to write and publish abstracts. 
• If the work is to genuinely stand on its own merits, these linkages must be made “up front” in every step of the presenting and publication processes. 
• It must be stated if a study was sponsored by the industry or if one or more of the authors work for or advise the maker of the product being tested.

• Making The Background Of The Study Abundantly Clear
  • This succinct section addresses the question “Why did you start?”. 
  • As a researcher, you should provide adequate background information on what your motivation to carry out the research study was. 
  • Because there isn’t much room, one or two brief sentences must do.
  • Additionally, the purpose of the study should be stated in this area, and ideally, the study’s hypothesis should be briefly stated as well. 
  • A genuine scientific investigation seeks to ascertain whether a claim is true rather than to establish its veracity. 
  • Even though its significance might not be immediately obvious, it truly has a significant effect. 
  • Therefore, the hypothesis can be that device X is better than other devices or that it is the same as other devices, but the formulation of a formal hypothesis confirms the researchers’ objectivity and absence of bias toward any particular result. 
  • Additionally, it concentrates both the author and the reader on the true meaning of the abstract. 
  • Here are two examples of succinct but detailed research hypotheses – 
    • “We predict that incorporating carbon nanotubes into the concrete’s structure will significantly enhance its compressive potency and toughness.”
    • “When artificial intelligence methods are made use of to steer autonomous vehicles, we anticipate a substantial downsizing in energy usage and emissions.”

• Focussing On The Methods Part Of Your Abstract
  • An abstract and the methods portion of a research paper can both be written before any actual data collection or study has started. 
  • What you did as part of your research study is answered in this section. 
  • Reviewers and editors most frequently point out this area of submitted manuscripts as lacking and the cause for its rejection. 
  • In an abstract, the methods must be briefly described, and many specifics of the work must be left out. 
  • However, the reader can get a decent impression of the study’s design, the setting in which it was conducted, and the patients or measurements that were included in the space that is available. 
  • It should be made clear whether a study involved patients or other human subjects was prospective or retrospective and whether randomization was used. 
  • It is important to specify the environment in which the study was conducted as well as the source of the sample (e.g., convenience sample, sequential series, or randomly selected).

• Offering A Clear Overview Of The Results Discovered
  • Here, the reader should be informed about the study’s findings in the abstract.
  • It is unacceptable to use phrases like “The findings will be presented.” 
  • Even if there isn’t much room, it’s critical to present the key findings in the form of actual facts rather than just generalizations like “We discovered device X to be superior to devise Y.” 
  • Even if no statistically significant differences were discovered, the results that are relevant to the study’s hypothesis and that make up the main endpoints indicated in the procedures must be presented. 
  • As much information as space permits should be provided in the report of the data from which the conclusions will be drawn.
  • Even though differences in one or more secondary or peripheral (or even unplanned) variables may be statistically significant, a study may occasionally be negative in terms of the primary outcome variable. 
  • In such situations, the core argument should not be overlooked. 
  • If space permits, it is preferable to note that there was no change in the study’s main finding rather than refocusing the investigation on the results that were statistically significant.
  • When a difference comes out to be p 0.09 or 0.15, even though the study’s design called for a p 0.05 difference to be deemed significant, the difference is not significant at all. 
  • The discussion of trends and “near-significant variances” is almost always incorrect. 
  • The significance of discrepancies in the results will depend on the estimates of power and sample size that should be determined prior to the start of data collection.
  • If a table or graphic communicates the study’s results more clearly than words alone, it may be included in the abstract. 
  • The table or figure must be readable for the labels and data points to be useful because the abstract will be condensed for publishing. 
  • The significance of paying close attention to this topic can be shown by carefully examining any collection of published abstracts, where the intended contents of some tables and figures are weakened or lost entirely because they are just too small to see. 
  • Whether a table or figure will improve the abstract’s message or just add clutter depends on the nature of the research and its conclusions; they shouldn’t be included unless they are absolutely necessary to effectively communicate the results. 

• Making The Conclusions Arrived At Distinct
  • The study’s findings and their significance should be briefly discussed in the abstract (also referred to as the “implications” section) of the paper. 
  • Making more of the data than is necessary in such situations is the mistake most frequently made. 
  • The study’s findings should be used to support reasonable conclusions. 
  • The results might not be generalizable if the study was restricted to a certain patient population, a particular therapy, or the functionality of a technology under particular circumstances. 

• The Sort Of Writing Techniques You Should Be Aware Of & Deploy
  • Clarity and precision are vital when it comes to writing an engineering research paper because they help to ensure that the research is easily understood and can be replicated by other researchers.
  • For example, consider a research paper on the design of a new type of solar cell. 
  • If the paper is not written clearly and precisely, it may be difficult for other researchers to understand the design of the solar cell, replicate the research, or build upon the findings.
  • On the other hand, if the paper is written with clear and precise language, it would include a detailed explanation of the materials and methods used, the results obtained, and the conclusions drawn. 
  • It would also include clear diagrams and illustrations to help readers understand the design of the solar cell and the research results.

• The font to use may be specified in the abstract preparation instructions, which are typically very clear about margins and minimum sizes. 
• When compared to mechanical or nonproportional fonts, proportional fonts like Arial or Times New Roman allow for more words to fit into the available area. 
• It’s crucial to avoid trying to circumvent the guidelines by selecting a smaller font or lowering the line spacing below single-spaced. 
• These facts reveal. 
• The abstract needs to be written exactly as per the guidelines.
• Using straightforward language when writing an engineering research paper is important because it helps to ensure that the research is easily understood by a wide range of readers, including researchers in the same field, as well as those from other disciplines.
• For example, consider a research paper on the design of a new type of aircraft wing. 
• If the paper is written using complex jargon and technical terms, it may be difficult for readers who are not experts in aerospace engineering to understand the design of the wing and the research results.
• On the other hand, if the paper is written using straightforward language, it would use simple and clear explanations of the materials and methods used, the results obtained, and the conclusions drawn. 
• It would also use clear diagrams and illustrations to help readers understand the design of the wing and the research results.
• In addition, this paper would also avoid using unnecessary technical terms and acronyms unless they are widely accepted and used in the field.

• Important Activities To Carry Out Prior To The Submission Of Your Abstract
  • Despite best efforts, there is frequently a need to rush through the steps involved in submitting an abstract (much like the propensity for authors to rush through the steps to submit papers when it comes to journal publication) before it is too late. 
  • Before printing the final abstract onto the submission form, it is crucial to read the instructions again and confirm that they have been followed exactly. 
  • Not having even one typographical, grammatical, or spelling issue should be the target. 
  • An annoying truth of abstract submission is that, despite numerous proofreadings, mistakes frequently go unnoticed by the author who has spent so much time on it. 
  • Having someone who is not involved in the study read the abstract can be quite beneficial. 
  • Each mentioned author must read and approve the abstract before the final draft is submitted.

• An essential step in the research process that helps a project be completed in a number of ways is preparing an abstract for presentation at a scientific conference. 
• The same fundamental guidelines that encourage success in research are also used to write successful abstracts. 
• The most crucial approach for writing the abstract is to concentrate on the main questions of why the work was done, how it was done, what was discovered, and what the potential consequences are. 
• The likelihood of developing a high-quality abstract and having it accepted for presentation will be increased by clear, direct communication throughout the writing process, strict adherence to stated standards and format requirements, and meticulous proofreading.

• What You Should Know About Submitting Conference Abstracts
  • Various scientific conferences may have different guidelines for the ideal format for submitting abstracts. 
  • Remember that you must submit an original paper in addition to the conference abstract, regardless of the restrictions. 
  • The final original manuscript abstract and the conference abstract are seen as being a part of the same process. 
  • Therefore, strive to make the first one just as good as the last.

• Unstructured abstracts make it difficult to understand the project’s accomplishments quickly. 
• An advantage of a structured abstract is that it might include an introduction, methods, results, and conclusions. 
• This closely resembles the early 20th-century IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) approach, which is still employed in most papers published in top scientific and engineering journals today. 
• For original works, use this approach, where D in your abstract stands for discussion rather than conclusions. 
• Even while organized abstracts may seem longer, their readers find them to be more useful and more understandable.

• Think about your main findings and conclusions when you write the initial sections of the abstract. 
• Request advise from your mentor and fellow authors. 
• Avoid using discussion points or comments like “this is the first study to indicate…” in your abstract. 
• There’s a good chance that ten other groups are working on related tasks and that five more have already reported their findings at meetings you missed.
• You can download an abstract on a related topic or a study design that is comparable to that was published in the proceedings of a prior stroke conference or a peer-reviewed manuscript to get past the initial “writer’s cramp”, or the mental difficulty of starting scientific writing. 
• The majority of abstracts presented at significant international conferences are of a high caliber since they survived a competitive screening process with a less than 30% acceptance rate. 
• Take inspiration from how earlier authors have defined their topics and research methods; after all, flattery is best served by imitation. 
• Give reviewers more information about your patient population so they can comprehend the originality or relevance of your findings. 
• Be succinct but precise. Just as readers’ and reviewers’ attention spans are constrained by space (the maximum amount of words or characters allowed), so are your options. 
• Not all reviewers are native English speakers, and they value a clear, basic, and plain writing style that highlights the uniqueness of your study and the statistically sound presentation of the data given. 
• Reviewers frequently have to score 1100 abstracts.

• Indicate the study’s methodology, such as a phase I or II clinical trial, a case series, a cohort, or a retrospective analysis. 
• Briefly but comprehensively describe the subject selection criteria and data-gathering methods so that peers can comprehend what was done. 
• A literature reference that details the study methodologies is rarely required and is frequently not even desired. 
• In order to eliminate peer reviewer prejudice, anonymous reviews are typical at conferences. 
• Therefore, it is considered unfair and against the regulations to make any references to the entity that submitted the abstract. 
• Do not include real data in this area, such as the number of subjects or their initial characteristics. 
• The Results section is where the data presentation belongs. 
• Rather than describing outcomes or dependent variables, describe the scales or methods utilized for evaluation and recruitment.

• Although suggested, the protection of study participants is frequently left out of abstracts because of length considerations. 
• Before starting a study, you must acquire the approval of your local ethics commission. 
• It is presumed that this is the case for abstract reports. 
• Mention local ethical or institutional review board permission and participant-signed informed consent for human studies clearly when you present data at a meeting.

• The quality, freshness, dependability, and significance of your work in the field of science or medicine are the most crucial criteria for abstract admittance to a prominent and competitive meeting. 
• Reviewers have been known to favor well-written abstracts from the United States or other English-speaking nations, so if you are not a native English speaker, present your copy to someone who can correct your spelling, grammar, and style. 
• Indicate in plain terms the sort of study design that largely dictates the selection of statistical analysis methods and leaves room for the important part that follows. 

• General Guidelines For Abstract Submissions To Be Expected At Top International Conferences In 2023 
  • When submitting an abstract for a paper, authors attest that the data have never been published before, have never been presented at a significant annual scientific meeting, and are not planning to present or publish them before the dates of the conference that they’re presenting at. 
  • The novelty of the research, the importance of the findings, and clarity will be the criteria used by the Conference Cochairs to assess the scientific quality of the submitted abstracts. 
  • Authors should be especially aware of the significance of clearly and concisely stating the study’s objectives and assumptions as well as summarising any novel, unpublished findings. 
  • The paper will not be approved for presentation at the conference if an abstract is badly written to the point that the Conference Co-Chairpersons are unable to assess its uniqueness and importance.

• Authors should take into account the following when submitting their abstracts for presentation at any high-level international conference that they plan on presenting their research in 2023 –
  • 1. In order for the Conference Co-Chairpersons to assess the caliber, originality, and thoroughness of the study, abstracts must succinctly convey the goals and findings of the research. 

Each abstract should include the following elements –

• (a) a brief statement of the study’s objectives; 
• (b) a brief description of any relevant experimental techniques; 
• (c) a summary of any new, unpublished data; and 
• (d) a statement of the findings. The statements in the authors’ abstracts must be solely their own. 

All references should be made using American spelling.

• Titles should give you what the abstract will be about. In order to enable electronic retrieval, the title should contain all terms required to identify the topic (if applicable). In abstract titles, stay away from nonstandard abbreviations.
• Please make sure that the names of all the drugs in your abstract are generic. Trade names in the title or text of an abstract may exclude it from being accepted for a presentation.
• As long as they are defined at the beginning of the text, abbreviations may be used throughout the body of an abstract. It is necessary to find complicated treatment plans.
• Your abstract’s body cannot have more than 3100 characters, including spaces. Please take note that tables and figures are not allowed. The character restriction does not apply to the list of authors and institutions. Abstracts that go over this limit will not be accepted by most online abstract submission systems.
• Adhering To Data Disclosure Standards 

A standard for disclosure of research data required for those submitting abstracts at engineering conferences may include the following:

Data Availability

Research authors must provide a statement indicating the availability of their data and any restrictions on its use. This may include information on how the data can be accessed, any necessary permissions or ethical clearance required, and any fees associated with obtaining the data.

Data Description

Research authors must provide a detailed description of the data sets used in their research, including information on the sources, methods of collection, and any preprocessing or cleaning that was done.

Data Analysis

Research authors must provide a clear explanation of the methods used for data analysis and any statistical tests or models applied. They should also provide details of any software or tools used for data analysis.

Data Validation

Research authors must provide information on the validity and reliability of their data, such as the measures used to ensure quality and accuracy. They must also provide any information on potential sources of bias or uncertainty in their data.

Data Reproducibility

Research authors should indicate how their data can be reproduced by other researchers, including any code or software used to process or analyze the data.

It is vital to note that the above list is not exhaustive, and authors should carefully review the guidelines of the specific conference they are submitting to in order to ensure full compliance with all requirements.

• Supplemental data submitted with the abstract cannot be sent to the conference cochairs for assessment due to administrative and time restrictions.
• The authors are accountable for the submitted abstract’s accuracy. The abstract will be published as closely as possible to as it was submitted. Before submitting their abstracts, authors should carefully write and proofread them. Any mistakes you made when submitting your abstract will probably be printed. 
• Before submitting, authors are highly advised to print a paper copy of their abstract for their records.
• To attend most international scientific conferences, all presenters must register.
• An abstract may be removed if the presenter does not register after it has been accepted.
• An initial email confirmation of receipt will be sent to those who submit abstracts. The presenter will also receive notifications of abstract receipt.

Choose the best upcoming conference in 2023 by simply looking up the IFERP conference listing.