Guidelines for abstracts

Guidelines for abstract submission

Abstract rating grid is here

Before submission please read carefully each session description and choose the most appropriate one

In order to proceed to an equivalent review of all abstracts, please follow as well as possible this writing guidelines. Nevertheless, sessions concerning very diverse subjects, every scientific committee will take into account specificities of each discipline.

  • Abstracts must be written in English 

  • They must contain 3 or 4 parts:

    a) introduction of context and presentation of scientific question(s) and/or objective(s) of the study,

    b) method(s) used,

    c) found or expected result(s) (depending on the progress of your study) and then

    d) discussion and conclusion(s) in which statements based on found results must be justified and answer the objective(s) of the study developed in the introduction.

     

  • DO NOT EXCEED 250 WORDS
  • Six keywords are expected

  • The overall abstract must be clear and well structured 

  • Please, be relevant when informing about your study as follows:

Title

Authors names: First name LAST NAME1*, First name LAST NAME2, etc. and First name LAST NAME3

With *corresponding author: email address

And presenting author: email address

With affiliations: 1: affiliation number 1; 2: affiliation number 2; etc

Author's academic level (Master, PhD candidate, PhD, research fellow...)

Type of presentation: Oral/Poster

Session

 

Each abstract is read at least by three reviewers from the scientific committee of the corresponding session. Selection criterions are based on the above points as well as on the ranking grid available on the website. This grid details the points on which the notation is made. For each criterion (there are nine), a score from 1 to 4 can be given.

Each abstract will get an average of the scores given by every reviewer. Thus the abstracts could be ranked within each session. The final decision of acceptance / rejection for oral presentation or poster will be based on this ranking. The reviewers will also provide a general comment on every abstract. The evaluation can be send to the authors on demand.

The top 8 abstracts of each session are selected for an oral presentation.

15-30 best abstracts behind those selected for the oral presentation will be selected to present their work as a poster.

If it turns out that one of the speakers cannot be present, the 9th best abstract will be proposed to make an oral presentation instead of a poster, and so on.
Online user: 1