Guide to Writing an Abstract

The Eastern States Conference is an opportunity for residents to gain experience in the process of abstract writing and presenting research in a format similar to what would occur at any national meeting. It is understood that by the time abstracts are due for submission, many resident may not have completed their projects or have analyzed any results obtained.

Writing an effective abstract is best learned under the supervision of a more experienced mentor. If you do not have experience in this area, we suggest that you seek input from colleagues within your institution to review and critique the abstract before its submission. Submitted abstracts are not peer-reviewed by the members of the Eastern States Conference Advisory board, but abstracts that do not meet the restrictions described below run the risk of being truncated.

There is 2000 character limit (including spaces) for the abstract. This limit does not include the title or author information.

Proofread your abstract carefully. After the deadline for submission, changes cannot be made to the title or content. Your abstract will appear online as submitted. ESRC advisory board members will NOT edit abstracts.

General Suggestions

• Review your abstract with your preceptor or program director BEFORE submitting it to the conference.
• Use a standard typeface such as Helvetica or Times.
• Standard abbreviations may be used without definition (e.g., mg/dl, mMol/L, ng/ml), but nonstandard abbreviations must be placed in parentheses after the first use of the word in the abstract body. It is important to keep nonstandard abbreviations to a minimum, this allows ease of readability and understanding of the abstract.
• When presenting a medication, use only the generic name.
• Residents may update or correct their abstract after submitted up to the deadline. No changes to abstracts will be allowed after February 12, 2010.

Title

• The abstract title accurately and concisely to the reader what the study or project is about. The title will appear in print exactly as you type it.
• The title should not be misleading and must pertain to the research hypothesis, methods, results, and conclusions of the project.
• A short, concise title is preferable as it may more easily catch a readers attention. There is a 255 character limit (including spaces). Do not use abbreviations in the title.
• Do not use proprietary (brand) names in the title.
• Do not use all CAPITAL letters in the title. Capitalize only the first letter of the first word in the title; all other words must be in lowercase letters, except in the case of acronyms or proper nouns (countries, etc.).
• Do not use "A," "An," or "The" as the first word in the title.
• Spell out all pharmaceutical acronyms.
• Special symbols (Greek letters; mathematical signs - equal, plus, minus, percentage, greater than, lesser than, etc.) must be spelled out.
• Only put the title of the abstract in the title field. DO NOT put it in the body of the abstract.
• Title Examples:
  Correct: Assessment of adherence to guidelines in cardiovascular disease
  Incorrect: ASSESSMENT OF ADHERENCE TO GUIDELINES IN CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE
  Incorrect: Assessment Of Adherence To Guidelines In Cardiovascular Disease
  

Authors

• The resident does not have to indicate their name as an author when submitting their manuscript. This information will automatically be completed when the abstract is printed. An additional authors the resident wishes to indicate and their affiliations (if different from the resident) should be indicated in the appropriate field of the Abstract Registration Form.
• Authorship credit should be awarded only to those individuals who substantially contribute to: 1) conception and design or analysis and interpretation of data; and 2) drafting of the abstract or manuscript or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the abstract or manuscript submitted.
• Participation solely in the collection of data does not justify authorship.

Objective

• The introductory sentence may be stated as a research hypothesis, purpose, or objective. Alternatively, the sentence may state the current evidence for a particular finding.
• A hypothesis is a supposition or conjecture used as a basis for further investigations.
• The objective is the end result that the resident is trying to achieve by conducting a particular project.
• This part of the abstract should be limited to one to three sentences.

Methods

• The methods section is possibly the most difficult section to write in a condensed form as it should be limited to no more than two to three sentences.
• Briefly describe the objectives and methods of the project, if pertinent. Included in these sentences may be a description of the study population (e.g., human or animal [species]) and outcome variables (e.g., pharmacodynamic or pharmacokinetic variables). Any analytical techniques used (e.g., HPLC, microbiological assay, in vitro system), as well as frequency and collection procedures for sample procurement, should be described.
• A brief description of statistical methods used (if any) may be included.
• Case studies may state over what period the cases were collected and which patient characteristics were used as inclusion and exclusion criteria.
• For a retrospective project, the authors may describe enrollment procedures including selection and exclusion criteria.

Results

• The results should be stated succinctly to support only the research hypothesis or conclusions made.
• Description of any interim results available are encouraged.
• If results are not available at the time of abstract submission, it is reasonable to describe the information or outcomes you expect to be able to reach from your project and state that “results will be presented.”

Conclusion(s)

• The conclusion(s) should be brief, highlight the impact of the project, and follow the methods and results in a logical fashion.
• A common mistake is to restate results in this section. Rather, the utility of the data and their potential role in the management of patients or to pharmacy practice should be emphasized.
• New information or conclusions not supported by data in the results section should be avoided. If the conclusion is unknown because the project has not been completed at the time of abstract submission, the anticipated conclusion can be described.

ABSTRACT (Do not exceed 2000 characters. Do not include figures or graphs. Organize the abstract of research presentations as follows: OBJECTIVE, METHODS, RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS):

EXAMPLE

Assessment of adherence to guidelines in cardiovascular disease
A. Orsi, L. Baruch; Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC), Bronx, New York

OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular disease continues to be the leading cause of mortality and morbidity in the United States. Aggressive prevention and management strategies have been shown to have a significant positive impact on the natural history of the disease. Professional organizations, such as the American Heart Association (AHA) and the American College of Cardiology (ACC) develop and update guidelines and consensus statements to establish and promote evidence-based patient care. Documenting practitioners' adherence to these guidelines is the first step toward identifying a lack of adherence, determining its etiology, formulating a solution, and ultimately improving the standard of care.

METHODS: Medical records of patients who visited primary care or cardiology clinics in the Bronx VAMC during a three-month period were reviewed. Data was collected and integrated into an active database program to allow uniform review of each record. Each patient's medical management was evaluated for compliance with guidelines using specific treatment and diagnostic markers. Guidelines assessed included: blood pressure goals as defined by the Sixth Report of the Joint National Committee (JNC VII); ACC/AHA Guidelines on aspirin in cardiovascular disease and beta blockers in myocardial infarction and heart failure; LDL goals as defined by the National Cholesterol Education Program; antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation as defined by ACC; and use of aspirin for prevention of coronary heart disease as defined by the Framingham guidelines.

RESULTS: The number and percentage of treatments that deviated from the guidelines will be recorded and results will be presented.

CONCLUSION: It is anticipated that this project will demonstrate a role for pharmacist-based patient assessment and intervention in order to increase compliance with adherence to evidence based guidelines in the treatment of cardiovascular disease.