How the Abstract Committee Reviews Abstracts

This article originally appeared in Perspectives in Genetic Counseling (23:4 – Winter 2001/02)

Cheryl Dickerson, MS, Cathy Wicklund, MS, Susan Estabrooks, MS & Elizabeth Melvin, MS

Our goal is to select high quality abstracts based on quality research for oral and poster presentations. Quality research can enhance patient care, justify the time and expense that genetic counselors put into attending our conference and enhance the professional reputation of genetic counselors.

These guidelines can be applied to quantitative and qualitative research as well as case reports. Quantitative research is hypothesis testing whereas qualitative is hypothesis generating.

Guidelines for Acceptance

Does the abstract comply with basic guidelines?

• It should have a clear message of original work and include only one or two major points. If there are more, write an additional abstract.
• The work should not have been previously published as a manuscript.
• It should not be based on anticipated data. Abstracts stating “results will be presented” or some variation of this will be rejected.

Are the major components included?

An abstract generally has six parts: title, introduction/statement of the question, hypothesis/purpose, definition of the model and methods, results and conclusions. Case reports deviate from this scheme, but should include a title, purpose of reporting the case, the case itself and conclusions drawn from the case that have wider applicability or purpose.

• Title: Does the title summarize the abstract and grab the reader’s interest?
• Introduction/Statement of the Question: States the importance of the research and includes two key components: what is already known (previously reported information) and what is unknown (the question being investigated).
• Hypothesis/Purpose: Usually only one sentence, the hypothesis describes something that can be generated (qualitative research) or tested (quantitative research). It should be clear what the objectives of the study were. For case reports, the author(s) should clearly state why reporting the case is important.
• Definition of the Model and Methods: Usually this is one half to one third of the abstract. Not every research study has a theoretical framework, but if one was used either to frame the research or to interpret results, then this should be stated. Is the study population (and control group) defined along with how it was identified and selected? Did the author(s)…
• Define what was measured?
• Describe the tools used to measure the variable(s)?
• Use tools that measure the variables appropriately?
• Briefly describe the development of the tool, if it is a new tool?
• Define or assess the accuracy of the tool?
• Use the appropriate method of analysis for the intent of the study?
• Does the method of analysis…
• Fit the methodological approach?
• Describe how the data was tested?
• Results: Do the results/findings address the hypothesis or purpose of the study?
• Are the data presented in a clear, concise and consistent manner?
• Is the order in which the author(s) describe(s) items retained throughout the document?
• Conclusions: The conclusion should relate back to the purpose or hypothesis and be stated in simple terms.
• Is there clear and sufficient data to support the conclusions?
• For case reports, the contribution of the case should be clearly stated. It is not sufficient to simply describe the case. State how the case adds to what is already known about the subject manner.

References

Clark E. Writing a Quality Abstract for a Scientific Meeting, AJDC 142:422-424.

Taboulet P. Advice on writing an abstract for a scientific meeting and on the evaluation of abstracts by selection committees. (2000) Eur J Emerg Med 7:67-72.

We would like to acknowledge the contributions of Bob Resta and Allyn McConkie-Rosell to the material in this article.