Call for Abstracts

Quick Links


Submit


Aims and Interests

The Congress will provide a forum for the presentation and discussion of new research into the quality and credibility of peer review and scientific publication, to establish the evidence base on which scientists can improve the conduct, reporting, and dissemination of scientific research.

Abstracts on any aspect of editorial and funding peer review, scientific and scholarly publication, research and reporting practices, reproducibility and access, and information exchange, covering a wide range of disciplines, including biomedicine, health science, applied science, basic science, physical science, as well as social science, narrative medicine, and humanities, will be considered.

Preference will be given to well-developed studies with generalizable results (eg, multijournal, multicenter, multiyear, and multiscience trials and controlled studies, and prospective observational studies). Retrospective studies, systematic reviews, bibliometric analyses, surveys, and other types of studies will also be considered.

Abstracts that report new research and findings will be given priority.

Sponsored Scholar Opportunities

Limited opportunities for scholars with demonstrated need (primarily from resource-poor countries) to apply for funding assistance to attend the Congress will be available. For more information, contact us at jama-peer@jamanetwork.org.

Back to top


Suggested Topics for Research

Bias
  • Biases of researchers, authors, reviewers, editors, funders/sponsors, commentators, and consumers of scientific publication
  • Reporting and publication biases
  • Efforts to manage or eliminate bias
  • Editorial and Peer Review Decision Making and Responsibilities
  • Models of peer review and decision making used by journals and funders
  • Evaluations of the quality, validity, and practicality of peer review and editorial decisions
  • Quality assurance for reviewers and editors
  • Editorial policies and responsibilities
  • Detecting and managing errors, corrections, and updates in scientific publication
  • Editorial freedom and integrity
  • Incentives and recognition for researchers, authors, reviewers, and editors
  • Research and Publication Ethics
  • Ethical concerns for researchers, authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, and funders
  • Authorship, contributorship, responsibility, and accountability
  • Conflicts of interest
  • Research and publication misconduct
  • Ethical conduct, review, and approval of studies
  • Confidentiality
  • Effects of funding and sponsorship on research and publication
  • Influence of external stakeholders: funders, academic/research institutions, journal owners, advertisers, policy makers, legal representatives, news and social media, and the public
  • Improving the Quality of Scientific Reporting, Reproducibility, and Access
  • Effectiveness of guidelines and standards designed to improve the quality of research reporting and scientific publication
  • Evaluations of the quality of all types of published scholarly information - research, reviews, and opinion
  • Evaluations of research reproducibility
  • Quality and effectiveness of study registries, data sharing, transparency, and access
  • Evaluations of reporting of research methods and analyses
  • Quality and reliability of data presentation and scientific images
  • Quality and use of online supplemental content and data sources
  • Quality and effectiveness of new forms of scientific articles
  • Peer Review and Publication Models
  • Single-blind, double-blind, open, and collaborative peer review
  • Prepublication posting and release of scientific information
  • Postpublication review, communications, and influence
  • Embargoes
  • Open and public access
  • Changes in readership and usage of peer-reviewed published content
  • Presentation, enhancement, and quality of scientific information in multimedia
  • Quality, use, and effects of publication metrics and usage statistics
  • Quality and influence of advertising and sponsored publication
  • Evaluations of new models for presenting and displaying scholarly articles
  • Assessments of new tools and services for researchers, authors, and editors
  • Quality and effectiveness of content tagging, markup, linking, and structures
  • Threats to scientific publication
  • The future of scientific publication
  • Communication and Dissemination
  • Evaluations of methods and standards for improving the quality, efficiency, and equitable distribution of scientific and scholarly information
  • Assessment of innovations that affect the quality, integrity, dissemination, and access of scientific and scholarly information
  • Quality of scientific communication in news and social media and effects on public critique and understanding

  • Back to top


    Preparing and Submitting Abstracts

    Please take care when preparing abstracts. Abstracts that do not meet these requirements will not be considered. Priority will be given to abstracts that report original research.

    Preparing the Abstract

    Abstract: Limit to 350 words and no more than 1 small table or figure. Provide a word count and title at the top of the abstract. The names of authors and other identifying information should not appear on the Abstract page to facilitate blinded review.

    Title Page: Submit a title page with abstract title, complete names and affiliations of all authors, each author’s potential conflicts of interest and financial disclosures (including declarations of no conflicts of interest), disclosures of funding support and explanation of the role of the funder/sponsor in the work, and any relevant acknowledgment information. The title page will not be shown to reviewers.

    Cover Letter: The cover letter should briefly describe the importance and relevance of the abstract and should indicate that the work described in the abstract is original and has not been previously published or submitted for publication and will not be published before the Congress in September 2017. Also indicate your availability to present the abstract during the Congress if it is accepted for presentation. The cover letter will not be shown to reviewers.

    Research Abstracts

    Priority will be given to abstracts reporting original research, such as the results of randomized controlled trials; cohort, cross-sectional, case-control, comparison, crossover, cost-effectiveness, and quality improvement studies; systematic reviews; meta-analyses; surveys; analyses of bibliometrics and key performance indicators; and retrospective reviews of data. Studies should follow the basic reporting requirements of the EQUATOR Network.


    Back to top


    Format

    Abstracts should be structured using the following headings and sections:

    Objective: Concise statement of the study question or hypothesis.

    Design: Description of how the hypothesis was tested or study question addressed. Include study type; dates of study/analysis; sample or data source; sample or data selection procedures; inclusion/exclusion criteria; intervention, exposure, or assessment; methods of analyses; and methods used to control for potential confounding/bias.

    Results: Description of what was found, with specific data. Provide absolute numbers and percentages (do not provide percentages alone). Provide numerators and denominators and response/participation rates, as appropriate. Quantify findings and present them with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty, such as 95% CIs, whenever possible. Avoid relying solely on statistical hypothesis testing, such as the use of P values alone. A single, small table or figure displaying the main results may be included.

    Conclusions: Brief statement of conclusions, limiting generalization to the study sample or data source.

    One author must be identified as the corresponding author. Provide a complete name, mailing address, telephone number, and e-mail address for the corresponding author. Submit complete names, affiliations, and e-mail addresses for all coauthors.

    Corresponding authors will be notified of decisions by the end of April 2017.

    Submitting the Abstract

    Submit between December 1, 2016 and February 15, 2017.


    Back to top