‹ ›

 

research-page

PHILIPPINE ACADEMY OF REHABILITATION MEDICINE - ASIAN SPINAL CORD NETWORK CONVENTION 2021

IF YOU WISH TO SUBMIT YOUR PAPER/S PLEASE FOLLOW THESE STEPS:

  1. The presenting author must email a letter of intent together with the abstract and manuscript to parmascon2021@gmail.com addressed to the PARM-ASCON 2021 Research Committee. Please write the following on the email’s subject heading: Research Category & Title
  2. Kindly follow the submission format guidelines on page 2: GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH ABSTRACT SUBMISSIONS
  3. At least one author of each paper/ manuscript must be registered to the PARM-ASCON 2021 Convention. No additional cost will be required for submission. Only authors of accepted papers will be invited to present during the PARM-ASCON 2021 Convention.
  4. Deadline for submission is July 30, 2021, 5:00PM (9:00AM GMT)
  5. The PARM-ASCON 2021 Research Committee will notify the author/s if the paper is accepted into either the oral or poster presentation on or before August 15, 2021.
  6. Once the selection is confirmed, please follow this guide for presentations:
    1. a. GUIDE FOR SCIENTIFIC PAPER ORAL PRESENTATIONS (See on Page 3)
    2. b. GUIDE FOR POSTER PRESENTATIONS (see on Page 4)
  7. All papers will be judged prior to the presentation based on the review guidelines for oral and poster presenters found on Page 5 and;
  8. Presenters will be given their Presentation/ Q&A schedule on or before August 31, 2021.
  9. Winners will be announced during the PARM-ASCON 2021 Convention.
  10. 10. Prizes:
    • First Place: 300 USD (Php 15,000)
    • Second Place: 200 USD (Php 10,000)
    • Third Place: 100 USD (Php 5,000)

GUIDELINES FOR RESEARCH ABSTRACT SUBMISSIONS

Only original papers will be accepted for review. Abstracts previously published in a journal or presented at another international scientific conference will not be considered. The topic must be about spinal cord injury, including but not limited to diagnosis, medical, and rehabilitation management (all aspects of SCI Care). To facilitate peer review, authors will categorize submissions under the following:

  • Case Reports/ Series
  • Reviews (Literature reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses)
  • Original Research (Descriptive or Analytical)
  • Qualitative Research (Health education for patient, medical students, or residents)
  • Quality Improvement or Applied Research

All abstracts must contain the following:

  1. Title: The title must contain a reference to the study design.
  2. Authors:Names must be written in the order of First Name, Middle Name, and the Last Name, followed by affiliation(s) indicated by superscript numeral(s). (e.g. Juan Dela Cruz1, Juana Dela Cruz2 and Josefa Dela Cruz2)
  3. Body: should be composed of ≤ 300 words. The content is structured by sections followed by a colon. Each section is treated as a paragraph with no indentation. The sections for each category are as follows:
    • Case Reports/ Series: Case Presentation; Intervention/Discussion, Outcome.
    • Reviews: Introduction; Objective; Methods (data sources, data extraction); Results; Conclusion.
    • Original Research: Introduction, Objective; Design; Setting; Participants; Interventions; Outcome Measures; Results; Conclusion, and for registered trials, Trial Registration.
    • Qualitative Research: Introduction; Methods (evidence acquisition); Results/ Observation (evidence synthesis); Conclusion.
    • Quality Improvement or Scientific Applied Research: Introduction, Objective; Methods (data sources, data extraction); Results; Conclusion.
  4. Funding Acknowledgement:Granting Agency (if any)
  5. Keywords:Authors are asked to include up to five keywords in alphabetical order. This will be used as an aid to coding and indexing. The keywords must be selected from the NLM Permuted Medical Subject headings (MeSH) at www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh

PLEASE NOTE: Only authors of qualified abstracts will be invited to make a pre-recorded presentation followed by Q&A during the PARM-ASCON 2021 Convention. Awarding will be done during the event and will be based on the written manuscript.

SCIENTIFIC PAPER ORAL PRESENTATIONS

The purpose of the oral research presentation is to impart original, high-quality, and innovative research to participants of the PARM-ASCon 2021 Convention.

For this reason, all papers should be analytical or experimental in nature. The papers will be selected based on their clinical impact, importance, and quality of the manuscript.

PRESENTER INFORMATION

  • All selected scientific papers for oral presentation will be pre-recorded and presented at a specific time and date. Presenters will be logged into the session to answer questions during and after the presentation.
  • The PARM-ASCON 2021 research committee, through Enderun Extension can assist you to record your presentation via Zoom, or you may opt to record it yourself and send the edited MP4 file to us via parmascon2021@gmail.com. All recordings must be submitted on or before August 31, 2021.
  • You will have a total of ten minutes for your presentation: 8 minutes for your recording and 2 minutes for Q&A. Please ensure your recording is not longer than 8 minutes.
  • All slides will be checked by the PARM-ASCON 2021 Research Committee prior to uploading the presentation.
  • Slide #1 must be your title slide.
  • Slide #2 must be your disclosure slide. Your disclosure statement should list all commercial relationships relevant to your abstract. Disclosures must not include the trade names or product-group messages.
  • Do not reference any company or product brand names during your presentation. Institution logos are allowed. (e.g. non-company/product logos such as universities, non-profit associations, and government agencies)

REVIEW GUIDELINES FOR ORAL PRESENTERS

Non-scored criteria:

If any of these criteria are not met, the abstract will not be accepted.

  1. Is the submission research or evidence-based? This may include a needs assessment, outcomes, or quality review for program development, preliminary or final data for an animal or human research study, needs assessment or outcomes for advocacy, etc.
  2. Is there an apparent conflict of interest that was not disclosed?
  3. Are there ethical concerns?
  4. Does it meet the criteria for the category in which it was submitted?

Scored Criteria:

Each abstract will be scored 0 to 5 for each of the 3 criteria below:

I. SCIENTIFIC MERIT:

  • Is the research design appropriate?
  • Do the outcomes/results align with the stated purpose/aim of the work?
  • For original papers, does the abstract reflect relevant reporting criteria for the study design https://www.equator-network.org/?
  • For program development, does the abstract include a scientific basis or outcomes for the work?
  • For novel research approaches, is evidence provided to support the approach?
  • For advocacy, is the need, approach, or outcomes based on evidence or scientific rationale?
  1. Exceptional: Study/project design is aligned with research/project question
  2. High quality: Occasional but perceptible flaws
  3. Moderate quality: With moderate flaws
  4. Low quality: Still presentable
  5. Does not meet criteria for proposed category: May still be accepted to another category
  6. Should not be accepted/presented

II. INNOVATION:

Does the abstract reflect a novel approach or propose a shift in the current research approach, clinical practice, or area of advocacy? Does it reflect recent innovations?

  1. Highly innovative and novel
  2. Moderately to highly innovative
  3. Moderately innovative
  4. Low in innovation but presentable
  5. Does not meet criteria for proposed category: May still be accepted to another category
  6. Should not be accepted/presented

III. CONTRIBUTION TO THE FIELD:

Is the problem or issue presented of high impact and importance to the field and to individuals living with spinal cord injury?

  1. High impact work with the potential to improve the lives of individuals living with SCI in areas of high priority
  2. Moderate-high impact
  3. Moderate impact
  4. Low impact but presentable
  5. Does not meet criteria for the proposed category but may still be accepted to another category
  6. Should not be accepted/presented

VIEW LESS

POSTER PRESENTATIONS

Posters may be a case report, descriptive, or analytical study. Each will be presented in the virtual poster gallery. The exhibit will provide a forum for a personal, in-depth discussion using narratives and visual materials to convey and communicate the abstract objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. The utilization of visual material such as high-resolution photographs, charts, and diagrams is very important and highly recommended. The Author, acting as the main resource person, must be present at the designated date of presentation to discuss the poster with interested individuals.

PRESENTER INFORMATION

  • The presenting author is the main point of contact for all abstract co-authors.
  • All communication and inquiries will be sent to the presenting author.
  • All posters uploaded must be in a PDF format set at the highest resolution possible. The aspect ratio (W: H) must be set at 16:
  • The complete virtual poster is limited to only one slide, meaning all components must fit on one single page of the PDF file.
  • Fonts should be sans-serif (e.g., Arial, Calibri, etc.) with a minimum size of 10pt.
  • The author must be available to answer questions about the poster during the assigned date and time.
  • The author will receive a notification as soon as the virtual conference is ready to accept the poster upload.
  • The deadline to email (parmascon2021@gmail.com) and upload your poster is on or before August 31, 2021.
  • Please refer to this link for a recommended new format for poster presentations:

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/06/11/729314248/to-save-the-science-poster-researchers-want-to-kill-it-and-start-over

REVIEW GUIDELINES FOR POSTER PRESENTORS

Non-scored criteria:

If any of these criteria is not met, the abstract will not be accepted.

  1. Is the submission research or evidence-based? This may include a needs assessment, outcomes, or quality review for program development, preliminary or final data for an animal or human research study, needs assessment or outcomes for advocacy, etc.
  2. Is there an apparent conflict of interest that was not disclosed?
  3. Are there ethical concerns?
  4. Does the session meet the criteria for the category in which it was submitted?

Scored Criteria:

Each abstract will be scored 0 to 5 for each of the 2 criteria below:

I. SCIENTIFIC MERIT:

  • Is the research /program design appropriate?
  • Do the outcomes/results align with the stated purpose/Aims of the work?
  • For original papers, does the abstract reflect relevant reporting criteria for the study design https://www.equator-network.org/?
  • For program development, does the abstract include a scientific basis or outcome for the work?
  • For novel research approaches, is evidence provided to support the approach?
  • For advocacy, is the need, approach, or outcomes based on evidence or scientific rationale?
  1. Exceptional: Study/project design is aligned with research/project question
  2. High quality: Occasional but perceptible flaws
  3. Moderate quality: With moderate flaws
  4. Low quality: Still presentable
  5. Does not meet criteria for proposed category: May still be accepted to another category
  6. Should not be accepted/presented

II. CONTRIBUTION TO THE FIELD:

Is the problem or issue presented of high impact and importance to the field and to individuals living with spinal cord injury?

  1. High impact work with the potential to improve the lives of individuals living with SCI in areas of high priority
  2. Moderate-high impact
  3. Moderate impact
  4. Low impact but presentable
  5. Does not meet criteria for proposed category but may still be accepter to another category
  6. Should not be accepted/presented

VIEW LESS