2010 PHC Research Conference: Abstract update

SUBMITTED abstracts

* LETTERS TO ABSTRACT SUBMITTERS WILL BE SENT FROM TUESDAY 27 APRIL *

WHAT WE DID WITH THE ABSTRACTS YOU SUBMITTED

Many thanks to all who submitted abstracts to this Conference, and to those involved in the reviewing process. Though we are meeting in Darwin, or maybe because of this, we received more abstracts than ever before – 368 in all – 317 for papers and posters, 30 for the AAAPC distinguished papers, 12 for symposia and nine for workshops.

PAPERS AND POSTERS

As stated on the website:

Poster and paper abstracts (250 words) must include title, aim and rationale, method, findings and benefits to the community. Preference for paper presentations is given to completed research.

We received 317 abstracts, 276 requested a paper presentation, and 41 requested a poster presentation. The program has 132 paper slots. All abstracts were blind peer reviewed by two reviewers with each reviewer scoring against the following categories:

• Abstract contains sufficient information to allow a delegate to establish what may be gained by attendance at the presentation
• Abstract is well written (clear succinct, engaging)
• The research methodology is appropriate for the aims of the study
• Benefits to the community are clearly indicated
• Abstract adheres to guidelines, ie. up to 250 words - body of abstract is arranged under following headings: aims and rationale, methods, findings, and benefits to the community.

Reviewers were also encouraged to provide comments for improvement. In addition, they provided an overall evaluation – definitely accept/borderline/reject and a recommendation – paper/poster.

We sent comments to all authors providing feedback and suggestions for them to consider. In the past this had only been provided to those authors who had their abstracts accepted on condition they rewrote and resubmitted their abstract taking on board the reviewers’ comments. Reviewers were also provided with comments from their counterparts to give them information of what others thought of the abstracts they had reviewed.

Providing reviewer comments is seen as a capacity building exercise for both abstract authors and peer reviewers.

Allocation of paper abstracts for paper slots was based on the following:

• Completed research project
• Recommendation from reviewers
• Final score from reviewers
• Comments from reviewers
• How well the abstract fitted with the concurrent session topics such that the program provides a comprehensive selection of current research.

Only one paper per person was allocated to a paper slot – to allow as many authors as possible to present.

Authors of paper abstracts that were not allocated to a paper slot but were approved were offered a poster.

Authors requesting a poster for their abstract which were approved (accept/borderline) by the reviewers were offered a poster.

Where reviewer’s evaluation was ‘reject’, authors were invited to resubmit their abstract based on the reviewers’ comments which, if accepted by a third reviewer, would then be offered a poster.

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF POSTERS AT OUR CONFERENCE

Over the past few years, PHC RIS has developed several strategies that enhance the value of posters at this Conference, namely:

• All posters are displayed for the entire Conference period
• Posters are displayed prominently where people gather during the breaks
• Posters are grouped into themes to make it easier for delegates to identify those posters that will interest them
• Instructions are provided to authors to assist them to produce eye-catching posters that will attract delegates to come and view them
• PHC RIS holds a best poster award at each conference
• Posters (in PDF format) are uploaded into our searchable ROAR database 
• We host a dedicated two hour Poster Reception (sponsored by AAAPC) at the Conference where authors can give information presentations of their research upon request, and delegates can view the posters and chat to the authors whilst both nibble and sip.
• Since posters are grouped by themes, authors also get the opportunity to talk to other authors doing similar research.

As one delegate from the 2009 Conference stated:

“Provided a dedicated opportunity to view the posters and an opportunity to speak with poster presenters and network with delegates. It was very useful having posters grouped together by topic.”

WORKSHOPS

As stated on the website:

These 3 hour workshops need to focus on skill development relevant to research, evaluation and development in general practice and primary health care. Your abstract (300 words) must include title, aim of workshop, outline how you propose to conduct the workshop, and describe what delegates can expect to get from attending

We received nine abstracts for four workshop slots. We selected these four based on whether they were skill building and indicated what delegates could expect from attending. We also wanted to make sure there was sufficient variety in the four workshops to ensure there was something for everyone attending the Conference.

SYMPOSIA

As stated on the website:

These 90 minute symposia are opportunities to present a substantial body of research findings that incorporates debate and discussion regarding how this can improve care. Your abstract (300 words) must include title, aim, methods, findings and relevance to the conference theme.

We received 12 abstracts for six symposium slots. As well as considering the quality of each abstract and the relevance to the Conference theme, we also considered the overall range of what could be presented. We wanted to make sure there was sufficient variety in the final six symposia to ensure there was something for everyone attending the Conference.

AAAPC ABSTRACTS

As stated on the website:

If you are submitting an abstract for a paper presentation and wish to be considered for this award, you will need to provide a longer abstract (400 words) that includes more methodological detail.

We received 30 abstracts for two distinguished paper slots. These were forwarded to AAAPC for blind peer reviewing by two reviewers for each abstract.

FEEDBACK

Your constructive feedback is most welcome

One of the aims of PHCRED is building research capacity which includes abstract writing. This year we developed an infoByte on writing great abstracts – and promoted it during the abstract submission period. We hope this helped.

Reviewers were also provided with comments from their counterparts to give them information of what others thought of the abstracts they had reviewed. Providing this information is seen as a capacity building exercise in peer reviewing.

We value any feedback and/or suggestions from reviewers and abstract submitters (please email Ellen McIntyre) to help us make this process better.

Regards,
Ellen McIntyre
Conference Convenor

View printer friendly version [PDF: 70KB]

Abstract Details

Abstracts were accepted on-line until COB Monday 22 March 2010.

The Primary Health Care Research Conference (formerly the GP & PHC Research Conference) is the premier annual event for primary health care networking. It is a must for anyone with an interest in primary health care research, evaluation and development. It will provide essential opportunities for researchers, decision makers, practitioners and consumers to share ideas, form collaborations and networks with speakers and other delegates.

The aims of the Conference are to:

• facilitate debate and discussion on key issues
• provide a forum for the presentation of research relevant to Australian Primary Health Care and the health reform
• provide opportunities for networking among keynote speakers and delegates
• offer workshops to develop skills and increase knowledge
• support research involvement by research users.

As we have come to expect, this conference will be an ideal opportunity to hear and discuss relevant research.

Building on from previous conferences and taking into account the increase in primary health care research, the program is an exciting blend of opportunities for presentations with workshops, symposia, poster and paper sessions, as well as the coveted Australian Association of Academic Primary Care (AAAPC) Best Paper Presentation at the AAAPC plenary session. including general practice, allied and community health, nursing, multidisciplinary teams and models of care. With the theme Primary health care research and health reform: Improving care, we are seeking abstracts for research that relates to the health reform agenda under the following themes:

• Access and equity
• Building research capacity
• Coordinated care of complex conditions
• Education and training of the workforce
• Research & evaluation methodology
• Health care systems
• Health literacy & self management
• Improved workforce conditions
• Knowledge exchange and translation
• Management of health information
• Patient-centred care
• Preventive health
• Quality of care
• Response to local needs

Speaker zone

Speaker zone login

Further information