- Email: [email protected]
SCVIR Scientific Program Update
SCVIR Scientific Program Update1 Janette D. Durham, MD Joseph Bonn, MD
THE SCVIR first sponsored the open submission of scientific papers a t the 1990 Annual Meeting, under the direction of Dr Gordon McLean. Since then, the Annual Meeting Committee, which is responsible for reviewing and grading all abstract submissions and designating the papers to be presented, has yearly examined the selection process and made changes to ensure that the process is fair and timely and that the best scientific work finds its way into the meeting. The result of these efforts is a superb scientific program invigorated by the diverse research of a national and international interventional radiology community. Members of the Scientific Program Committee have been on both sides of the selection process-as authors and as abstract reviewers. The experience of writing abstracts and having them accepted (and rejected) a s well as reviewing dozens of other authors' abstracts has given them a n opportunity to understand what makes a n ideal abstract. To help submitting authors gain this same understanding and to enhance the quality of abstracts submitted in the future, we have outlined the review and selection process below and have included suggestions on how to write a successful abstract. We have also used this opportunity to outline changes in the scientific program for the 1997 Annual Meeting, which you will find in the Call for Abstracts published in this edition of JVZR. Index terms: Editorials Society of Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology, 22nd annual meeting
JVIR 1996; 7:310-312 From the Department of Radiology, University of Colorado, 4100 W. 9th Ave (A0301, Denver, CO 80262 (J.D.D.), and the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pa. Received March 26,1996; accepted April 4. Address correspondence to J.D.D. O SCVIR, 1996
ORGANIZATION OF THE SCIENTIFIC PROGRAM Call for Abstracts The purpose of the Call for Abstracts is to announce the meeting and to publicize the submission deadline and the rules for submission. It is important to review the document each year to discover changes in submission rules. These are highlighted in a special box on the first page of the Call for Abstracts. This year the Call for Abstracts has been reorganized to incorporate a growing number of submission categories in the scientific program, including Scientific Papers, Scientific Posters, The Gary J. Becker Young Investigator Award, and the computer-assisted education exhibit, VIR.net. The addition of scientific posters to the annual meeting is in response to members' suggestions and is designed for authors to present works in progress, technical notes, and limited observations that have not undergone rigorous scientific investigation. I t is not intended a s a format for review articles or image galleries such as may be found in RadioGraphics. The text format mirrors the abstract, with Purpose, Materials and Methods, Results, and Conclusion sections. Brief, scheduled presentations by authors are planned as well. Space restrictions a t the 1997 meeting may limit the number of posters accepted. However, i t is the hope of the Committee that the opportunity to introduce innovative treatments in this format will stimulate the growth of the poster sessions into a n important component of the scientific program. The VIR.net exhibit provides a format for the display of computer-assisted educational programs and computer applications useful in the interventional radiology environment. The exhibitors a t the 1996 Annual Meet-
ing were identified by Committee members and invited to present their work. VIR.net abstracts for future meetings will be openly solicited from the interventional community.
Scientific Paper Selection Process The Scientific Program Committee is composed of 14 members including a chairman. A member's assignment is for a 3-year period, with approximately one-third of the committee turning over each year a s new members are selected by the current chairman. Permanent members include the editor of JVZR and the annual meeting workshop chairman, who is in charge of the Scientific Program Committee the following year. This year we have defined guidelines for choosing Committee members to geographically reflect the SCVIR membership, to limit representation from any one institution, and to represent expertise in a broad spectrum of interventional radiology topics. Abstracts are sent to three reviewers who are blinded to the author and institution. In addition, all abstracts are reviewed by the chairman. If a n abstract is recognized by the reviewer a s originating from his or her institution, the reviewer withdraws from evaluating the abstract and the chairman's review is substituted. The scores and comments of each reviewer are entered in a database, and abstracts are ranked according to the summed score. The chairman reviews the scores and comments of every abstract to resolve any major discrepancies in scoring, to review the previous presentation history of the abstract, and to sort the best papers into coherent paper sessions based on time and room availability a t the meeting. This year, 47% of the 377 submitted abstracts were accepted for presentation, a ratio similar to that in 1995.
Durham and Bonn
311
Volume 7 Number 3
imaging Investigation Purpose 1. Essential background sentence (optional) 2. Hypothesis Materials and Methods 1. Number of cases 2. Method of collection 3. Number of observers 4. Blinded or non blinded observations 5. Criteria for image analysis 6. Standard for final diagnosis Results 1. Exact number of observations 2. Statistical tests and results Conclusions 1. Impact statement: was hypothesis proven or not?
Figure 1. Checklist for abstract construction: imaging investigation. Used, with permission, from reference 1.
Procedural lnvestigation Purpose 1. Essential background sentence (optional) 2. Hypothesis Materials and Methods 1. Number of cases 2. Method of collection 3. Technical details 4. Evaluation process a. Criteria for analysis of outcome b. Number of observations 1) Blinded or non blinded observations 5. Standard for outcome analysis Results 1. Exact numbers of observations in compliance with accepted reporting standards 2. Statistical tests and their results Conclusions 1. Impact statement: was hypothesis proven or not?
Figure - 2. Checklist for abstract construction: procedural investigation. SUGGESTIONS ON HOW TO WRITE A SUCCESSFUL ABSTRACT The Reviewer's Grading System The reviewer's score is based on five considerations: 1)the appropriateness of the abstract for the SCVIR Annual Meeting, including timeliness and originality; 2) the abstract construction; 3) the study design; 4) the strength of the conclusions; and 5) the evidence that substantial work has been completed. An abstract may be penalized for the author's failure to follow the rules for submission outlined in the Call for Abstracts. Organization of the Abstract Dr Arthur De Smet has published a special communication in Radiology entitled "How To Write A Successful Abstract" (1).Previous commentaries on the RSNA Scientific Program are also available ( 2 4 ) . Rather than repeat these essays in detail, we would recommend all abstract writers read DeSmet's succinct review. We have reiterated a few of his most important comments below. The four sections of an imaging abstract (Purpose, Materials and Methods, Results, and Conclusions), and the composition of each section, as in Figure 1, are the essence of his discussion. Figure 2 is our minor modification of this checklist appropriate for a procedural rather than a n imaging abstract.
The most important part of the abstract, and the portion most often neglected, is the statement of Purpose. This should be a brief presentation of the question being addressed by the investigation. The Materials and Methods section should reflect a completed scientific investigation. A welldesigned experiment with adequate numbers of observations, even when examining an old question, generally scores favorably. Abstracts that summarize anecdotal experiences without any experimental design or those that promise future additions to the data by the time of presentation tend to fair poorly. In the Results section, i t is important to report numerical results and include a statistical evaluation whenever possible and appropriate. Accepted reporting standards should be followed; vascular interventions should be reported in accordance with the guidelines defined by Rutherford and Becker (5). Guidelines for reporting the results of clinical evaluation of new peripheral vascular devices are currently pending publication in JVIR. Guidelines for biliary stents, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, fertility, venous access, and dialysis access management are being developed. The Conclusion describes the relevance of the work, and places the results in the context of current scientific knowledge. It should not simply
restate the Results section and should not overstate their value.
Conflict of Interest The scientific program must comply with continuing medical education (CME) guidelines for the SCVIR to retain permission to award CME credits. Disclosure of the authors' potential conflict of interest, as in the newly required title slide statements, makes their financial incentive biases, or lack thereof, apparent to the audience a t the time of presentation. Such financial conflicts are not considered in the abstract scoring process. In addition, conflicts between the scientific program and commercial vendors must be avoided; an abstract may be penalized if a reviewer believes it promotes rather than scientifically examines a vendor's device. Publication Rights It is the intention of the committee to present a scientific program that contains a broad spectrum of original, well-designed scientific investigations. To this end, previously published material will not be considered for presentation. Abstracts that are presented a t other meetings which have not resulted i n scientific manuscripts will be considered for presentation if they are judged to be of sufficient value. Authors should be reminded that reproduction of an abstract in a
312
Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
second published meeting program may breech a copyright agreement with the first editor and may be considered plagiarism if the prior publication is not disclosed (6). Abstracts are accepted for presentation a t the SCVIR Annual Meeting with the understanding that a manuscript will be submitted either before or a t the meeting. These manuscripts become the property of JVIR. The author must insure he or she has no conflict with a submission requirement elsewhere. Authors will be required to identify the location and date of previous presentation on the Call for Abstracts, in the meeting program, and on a title slide a t the time of presentation.
I CONCLUSION During the selection process, the Committee receives many phone calls from authors with inquiries, criticisms, or suggestions for improvements. We hope to have answered some of your questions and concerns in this description of the selection process. We encourage your input, and we hope to continue providing you with a scientific program that fulfills your expectations. References 1. De Smet AA, Manaster BJ, Murphy WA. How to write a successful abstract. Radiology 1994; 190:571-572. 2. Redman HC. The a r t and some practical aspects of abstract writing. Radiology 1986; 158:270-271.
3. Hanvood-Nash DC. RSNA scientific program revisited. Radiology 1990; 174:241-242. 4. Murphy WA. RSNA scientific program. Radiology 1993; 186:17-18. 5. Rutherford RB, Becker GJ. Standards for evaluating and reporting the results of surgical and percutaneous therapy for peripheral arterial disease. JVIR 1991; 2:169-174. 6. Armstrong JD. Plagiarism: what is it, whom does it offend, and how does one deal with it. AJR 1993; 161:479-484.
THE SCVIR first sponsored the open submission of scientific papers a t the 1990 Annual Meeting, under the direction of Dr Gordon McLean. Since then, the Annual Meeting Committee, which is responsible for reviewing and grading all abstract submissions and designating the papers to be presented, has yearly examined the selection process and made changes to ensure that the process is fair and timely and that the best scientific work finds its way into the meeting. The result of these efforts is a superb scientific program invigorated by the diverse research of a national and international interventional radiology community. Members of the Scientific Program Committee have been on both sides of the selection process-as authors and as abstract reviewers. The experience of writing abstracts and having them accepted (and rejected) a s well as reviewing dozens of other authors' abstracts has given them a n opportunity to understand what makes a n ideal abstract. To help submitting authors gain this same understanding and to enhance the quality of abstracts submitted in the future, we have outlined the review and selection process below and have included suggestions on how to write a successful abstract. We have also used this opportunity to outline changes in the scientific program for the 1997 Annual Meeting, which you will find in the Call for Abstracts published in this edition of JVZR. Index terms: Editorials Society of Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology, 22nd annual meeting
JVIR 1996; 7:310-312 From the Department of Radiology, University of Colorado, 4100 W. 9th Ave (A0301, Denver, CO 80262 (J.D.D.), and the Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pa. Received March 26,1996; accepted April 4. Address correspondence to J.D.D. O SCVIR, 1996
ORGANIZATION OF THE SCIENTIFIC PROGRAM Call for Abstracts The purpose of the Call for Abstracts is to announce the meeting and to publicize the submission deadline and the rules for submission. It is important to review the document each year to discover changes in submission rules. These are highlighted in a special box on the first page of the Call for Abstracts. This year the Call for Abstracts has been reorganized to incorporate a growing number of submission categories in the scientific program, including Scientific Papers, Scientific Posters, The Gary J. Becker Young Investigator Award, and the computer-assisted education exhibit, VIR.net. The addition of scientific posters to the annual meeting is in response to members' suggestions and is designed for authors to present works in progress, technical notes, and limited observations that have not undergone rigorous scientific investigation. I t is not intended a s a format for review articles or image galleries such as may be found in RadioGraphics. The text format mirrors the abstract, with Purpose, Materials and Methods, Results, and Conclusion sections. Brief, scheduled presentations by authors are planned as well. Space restrictions a t the 1997 meeting may limit the number of posters accepted. However, i t is the hope of the Committee that the opportunity to introduce innovative treatments in this format will stimulate the growth of the poster sessions into a n important component of the scientific program. The VIR.net exhibit provides a format for the display of computer-assisted educational programs and computer applications useful in the interventional radiology environment. The exhibitors a t the 1996 Annual Meet-
ing were identified by Committee members and invited to present their work. VIR.net abstracts for future meetings will be openly solicited from the interventional community.
Scientific Paper Selection Process The Scientific Program Committee is composed of 14 members including a chairman. A member's assignment is for a 3-year period, with approximately one-third of the committee turning over each year a s new members are selected by the current chairman. Permanent members include the editor of JVZR and the annual meeting workshop chairman, who is in charge of the Scientific Program Committee the following year. This year we have defined guidelines for choosing Committee members to geographically reflect the SCVIR membership, to limit representation from any one institution, and to represent expertise in a broad spectrum of interventional radiology topics. Abstracts are sent to three reviewers who are blinded to the author and institution. In addition, all abstracts are reviewed by the chairman. If a n abstract is recognized by the reviewer a s originating from his or her institution, the reviewer withdraws from evaluating the abstract and the chairman's review is substituted. The scores and comments of each reviewer are entered in a database, and abstracts are ranked according to the summed score. The chairman reviews the scores and comments of every abstract to resolve any major discrepancies in scoring, to review the previous presentation history of the abstract, and to sort the best papers into coherent paper sessions based on time and room availability a t the meeting. This year, 47% of the 377 submitted abstracts were accepted for presentation, a ratio similar to that in 1995.
Durham and Bonn
311
Volume 7 Number 3
imaging Investigation Purpose 1. Essential background sentence (optional) 2. Hypothesis Materials and Methods 1. Number of cases 2. Method of collection 3. Number of observers 4. Blinded or non blinded observations 5. Criteria for image analysis 6. Standard for final diagnosis Results 1. Exact number of observations 2. Statistical tests and results Conclusions 1. Impact statement: was hypothesis proven or not?
Figure 1. Checklist for abstract construction: imaging investigation. Used, with permission, from reference 1.
Procedural lnvestigation Purpose 1. Essential background sentence (optional) 2. Hypothesis Materials and Methods 1. Number of cases 2. Method of collection 3. Technical details 4. Evaluation process a. Criteria for analysis of outcome b. Number of observations 1) Blinded or non blinded observations 5. Standard for outcome analysis Results 1. Exact numbers of observations in compliance with accepted reporting standards 2. Statistical tests and their results Conclusions 1. Impact statement: was hypothesis proven or not?
Figure - 2. Checklist for abstract construction: procedural investigation. SUGGESTIONS ON HOW TO WRITE A SUCCESSFUL ABSTRACT The Reviewer's Grading System The reviewer's score is based on five considerations: 1)the appropriateness of the abstract for the SCVIR Annual Meeting, including timeliness and originality; 2) the abstract construction; 3) the study design; 4) the strength of the conclusions; and 5) the evidence that substantial work has been completed. An abstract may be penalized for the author's failure to follow the rules for submission outlined in the Call for Abstracts. Organization of the Abstract Dr Arthur De Smet has published a special communication in Radiology entitled "How To Write A Successful Abstract" (1).Previous commentaries on the RSNA Scientific Program are also available ( 2 4 ) . Rather than repeat these essays in detail, we would recommend all abstract writers read DeSmet's succinct review. We have reiterated a few of his most important comments below. The four sections of an imaging abstract (Purpose, Materials and Methods, Results, and Conclusions), and the composition of each section, as in Figure 1, are the essence of his discussion. Figure 2 is our minor modification of this checklist appropriate for a procedural rather than a n imaging abstract.
The most important part of the abstract, and the portion most often neglected, is the statement of Purpose. This should be a brief presentation of the question being addressed by the investigation. The Materials and Methods section should reflect a completed scientific investigation. A welldesigned experiment with adequate numbers of observations, even when examining an old question, generally scores favorably. Abstracts that summarize anecdotal experiences without any experimental design or those that promise future additions to the data by the time of presentation tend to fair poorly. In the Results section, i t is important to report numerical results and include a statistical evaluation whenever possible and appropriate. Accepted reporting standards should be followed; vascular interventions should be reported in accordance with the guidelines defined by Rutherford and Becker (5). Guidelines for reporting the results of clinical evaluation of new peripheral vascular devices are currently pending publication in JVIR. Guidelines for biliary stents, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, fertility, venous access, and dialysis access management are being developed. The Conclusion describes the relevance of the work, and places the results in the context of current scientific knowledge. It should not simply
restate the Results section and should not overstate their value.
Conflict of Interest The scientific program must comply with continuing medical education (CME) guidelines for the SCVIR to retain permission to award CME credits. Disclosure of the authors' potential conflict of interest, as in the newly required title slide statements, makes their financial incentive biases, or lack thereof, apparent to the audience a t the time of presentation. Such financial conflicts are not considered in the abstract scoring process. In addition, conflicts between the scientific program and commercial vendors must be avoided; an abstract may be penalized if a reviewer believes it promotes rather than scientifically examines a vendor's device. Publication Rights It is the intention of the committee to present a scientific program that contains a broad spectrum of original, well-designed scientific investigations. To this end, previously published material will not be considered for presentation. Abstracts that are presented a t other meetings which have not resulted i n scientific manuscripts will be considered for presentation if they are judged to be of sufficient value. Authors should be reminded that reproduction of an abstract in a
312
Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
second published meeting program may breech a copyright agreement with the first editor and may be considered plagiarism if the prior publication is not disclosed (6). Abstracts are accepted for presentation a t the SCVIR Annual Meeting with the understanding that a manuscript will be submitted either before or a t the meeting. These manuscripts become the property of JVIR. The author must insure he or she has no conflict with a submission requirement elsewhere. Authors will be required to identify the location and date of previous presentation on the Call for Abstracts, in the meeting program, and on a title slide a t the time of presentation.
I CONCLUSION During the selection process, the Committee receives many phone calls from authors with inquiries, criticisms, or suggestions for improvements. We hope to have answered some of your questions and concerns in this description of the selection process. We encourage your input, and we hope to continue providing you with a scientific program that fulfills your expectations. References 1. De Smet AA, Manaster BJ, Murphy WA. How to write a successful abstract. Radiology 1994; 190:571-572. 2. Redman HC. The a r t and some practical aspects of abstract writing. Radiology 1986; 158:270-271.
3. Hanvood-Nash DC. RSNA scientific program revisited. Radiology 1990; 174:241-242. 4. Murphy WA. RSNA scientific program. Radiology 1993; 186:17-18. 5. Rutherford RB, Becker GJ. Standards for evaluating and reporting the results of surgical and percutaneous therapy for peripheral arterial disease. JVIR 1991; 2:169-174. 6. Armstrong JD. Plagiarism: what is it, whom does it offend, and how does one deal with it. AJR 1993; 161:479-484.