Login Search
Printed from: http://www.napcrg.org/Conferences/AnnualMeeting/CallforPapers


CALL FOR PAPERS

Submission deadline is 11:59 pm EDT, April 16, 2018

You are invited to submit a proposal to present a paper, poster, workshop or forum at the 46th NAPCRG Annual Meeting in Chicago, Illinois on November 9-13, 2018. Proposals on any topic relating to primary care research are welcome from researchers throughout North America and the rest of the world.  Regarding poster submissions, we give considerable time to poster sessions, have more space than is typical at meetings, and as such you are likely to receive more direct feedback and potential collaborators from a  poster presentation than from an oral presentation in a parallel session.


General Rules for All Submissions:  
  1. Submissions must meet all the requirements of the proposed category. View submission categories
  2. Incomplete submissions will not be reviewed. 
  3. A non-refundable submission fee of $20 US is required for each submission. NAPCRG accepts VISA, MasterCard, and American Express. 
  4. Acknowledgment of receipt of submissions will be e-mailed automatically after you complete your submission. Research that has been published at the time of abstractsubmission or presented at another national or international meeting is not acceptable.  
  5. ALL PRESENTERS MUST PAY THE REGISTRATION FEE. In addition, no honoraria or travel expense reimbursement will be provided for any presenter submitting through the call for presentations.
  6. Submissions must be entered using the online submission process located at www.napcrg.org no laterthan April 16, 2018. 

The Program Committee will consider proposals for a Symposium. This will consist of 5 research presentations on a related topic, followed by a discussant who will comment on the research and facilitate discussion. If you would like to propose a Symposium, please email pnoland@napcrg.org at the time of submission giving the titles of the papers, the presenting authors, and a proposed discussant. The Program Committee will consider the request, additionally each paper will still be considered individually for acceptance on its own merits. 

To accommodate as many presenters as possible, the NAPCRG Program Committee reserves the right to limit each presenter to only one presentation. However, anyone may be listed as a co-author on multiple papers and may present another person’s paper if the original presenter is not able to attend.

Letters of acceptance will be emailed by June 29, 2018. 

Questions? Contact us at 888- 371‐6397/913-906-6000, ext. 5410 or via email at pnoland@napcrg.org. 

Our CME requires each submission to include at least 2 learning objectives. Please follow these instructions!  

Learning Objectives: 

  1. List at least 2 learning objectives using these guidelines: Clearly describe what you want learners to take away and implement after the session in active, measurable terms (e.g. - define, interpret, explain, apply). 
  2. Each objective must be specific, concise, and limited to one sentence. 
  3. Example - "On completion of this session, participants should be able to identify and describe the three primary tenets of the Patient Self-Efficacy Model”.


Abstract Requirements

Length: Limit abstract to 300 words. (Do not include the title and authors).

Language: Abstracts must be in English.

Format: Type the body of the abstract as one paragraph. The abstract must be written in the third person. The abstract should contain the appropriate subheadings described below. The abstract should not contain references, or acknowledgments. Abstracts will be published as submitted. Before submitting your abstract, check carefully to make sure it contains no spelling or typographical errors. Type your abstract in a text document and then copy and paste it into the abstract field during the online submission process. Do not type your abstract directly into the abstract field as this will take too much time and the page may time out forcing you to restart the process.


Abstract Format for Oral Presentations and Posters:
Oral and poster presentations should use a structured abstract as described below. It should be formatted in a single paragraph no more than 300 words in length, as shown below:

Context: The abstract should begin with a sentence or two summarizing the rationale for the study, providing the clinical (or other) reason for the study question. In addition, the author should give a sentence or two about the importance of this work to family medicine/primary care. Objective: State the objective or study question/hypothesis addressed. If more than one objective is addressed, the main objective should be indicated and only key secondary objectives stated. Study Design: Describe the basic design of the study. In general, use one of the following descriptors: randomized controlled trial, quasi-experimental trial, cohort study, case control study, case series, survey, systematic review, meta-analysis, diagnostic accuracy study, ecologic study, economic analysis, qualitative study, or mixed-methods study. Setting or Dataset: Describe the study setting such as community or population-based, primary care or specialty, inpatient, intensive care unit, emergency department, or hospitalized care. For secondary data-analyses and systematic reviews, indicate the data source. Patients or Other Participants: State the inclusion and exclusion criteria and key sociodemographic features of patients. Provide numbers of participants (or studies) and how they were selected. Intervention/Instrument (for interventional studies): Describe the essential features of any interventions. Examples include a drug name, surgical procedure, diagnostic test, or counseling intervention. Main and Secondary Outcome Measures: Give the primary study outcome and any key secondary outcomes. Results: Give the main results of the study. The results should be quantified where appropriate (e.g. relative risks, absolute risk reduction, likelihood ratios). If research is in progress, state anticipated results. Conclusions: Report only those conclusions of the study that are directly supported by the evidence, along with any implications for clinical practice. Avoid speculation and overgeneralization. Equal emphasis should be given to positive and negative findings of equal scientific merit. If research is in progress, state methodological or conceptual problem that is being posed. Note: For brevity, parts of the abstract should be written in phrases rather than complete sentences. (e.g., “Design: Double-blind randomized trial,” rather than “Design: The study was conducted as a double-blind, randomized trial.”)

Abstract Format for Preconference Workshops, Workshops & Forums:
Abstracts for Preconference Workshops, Workshops, and Forums should use a structured abstract as described below. It should be formatted in a single paragraph, as shown below:

Objectives: What should participants expect to learn in the session in terms of skills as well as knowledge. Rationale: Explain why this session is important and relevant for NAPCRG members, in the context of the health system and current research. Participation: Describe how the session will involve the audience. Workshops and forums must include some degree of audience participation. Prerequisite Knowledge: Note whether or not any previous experience or knowledge is needed. If none is needed, state so. 

If the submission is a Preconference Workshop, the following information is also needed: 

Audience: Describe your audience, who and how many you expect to attend, and the basis for this estimate. Rationale: What is the proposed content area and why is it important to members of NAPCRG? Schedule – Describe the schedule, including the time frame, content of each section, and method of evaluation. Preconferences generally run ½ day (~3-4 hours) or an entire day (~ 7-8 hours). Why a Preconference?  Explain why this program should be presented as a preconference workshop rather than taking place within the normal meeting format (i.e., workshops and forum). Endorsement:  Preconference workshops must be endorsed by the chair of a NAPCRG Special Interest Group or Committee if the workshop topic relates to an existing SIG or committee. This is intended to facilitate communication and awareness of members and groups working on activities of common interest.



Review Criteria:

 
Each submission will be reviewed by at least 2 NAPCRG members and rated from 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest possible score. Oral presentations and posters on completed research will be rated based on methodologic rigor, the significance of the topic and research to primary care, its novelty and innovation, and the validity of the results. Posters on research in progress will be judged using the same criteria, minus validity of the results. Workshops and forum will be evaluated based on their relevance  to NAPCRG attendees, importance to the field, interactivity, innovation, and the need to provide a balance and mix of topics to attendees.





 

Each submission will be reviewed by at least 2 NAPCRG members and rated from 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest possible score. Oral presentations and posters on completed research will be rated based on methodologic rigor, the significance of the topic and research to primary care, its novelty and innovation, and the validity of the results. Posters on research in progress will be judged using the same criteria, minus validity of the results. Workshops and forum will be evaluated based on their relevance  to NAPCRG attendees, importance to the field, interactivity, innovation, and the need to provide a balance and mix of topics to attendees.