The Western Institute of Nursing (WIN) invites you to submit an abstract in research, project, or methodology and/or theory development/conceptual format to be considered for podium or poster presentation at the VIRTUAL 2021 WIN Conference, April 14-17. All abstracts, not to exceed 500 words, are to be submitted using WIN’s abstract submission form (see link at the bottom of this page). Submissions must be received by 11:59 PM Pacific time on Thursday, October 15, 2020. No extensions will be granted.
The WIN Program Committee will schedule papers in podium or poster sessions and will assign the dates and times of presentations. Each scheduled paper will be allotted fifteen minutes on the conference program. Notifications will be sent in mid-December. All presenters are required to register for the conference and to pay the applicable registration fees. Individuals may join WIN when registering for the conference to receive a discounted registration rate. If the primary author of an abstract is unable to attend the conference, the author should make arrangements for another individual to present the paper or poster, and that individual must register for the conference. The conference registration form and schedule will be available on the WIN website in late December/early January.
All abstracts will be included in the proceedings of the 54th Annual Communicating Nursing Research Conference. The proceedings will not be copyrighted, and abstracts may be published elsewhere. We request that authors include a notation that their abstracts were presented at the 54th Annual Communicating Nursing Research Conference of the Western Institute of Nursing.
A podium session consists of presentations of completed research, completed projects, or completed methodology papers and/or theory development/conceptual papers. Research results or project outcomes must be described in these abstracts. Research which is not completed at the time of abstract submission will not be considered for a podium presentation.
There are two kinds of podium sessions:
1. Individual Abstracts Podium Session: Consists of abstracts on similar or related topics grouped together by the Program Committee from abstracts accepted for presentation.
2. Symposium Podium Session: Consists of an overview abstract and three (minimum) to five (maximum) abstracts organized by the submitters to present as a set of planned abstracts related to a specific topic. Symposia may consist of research abstracts, project abstracts, or methodological and theoretical/conceptual abstracts. Symposia may also consist of a mixture of the types of abstracts. The overview is not counted towards the required number of abstracts (3-5) for a symposium, but will be allotted time for presentation on the conference schedule. The number of presenters should be equal to the number of papers in the symposium, excluding the overview. The Program Committee welcomes and encourages symposia that includes researchers from across a variety of institutions. Note: If any one abstract submitted for a symposium is not at the accepted standard for the conference, the entire symposium (all abstracts) will be rejected.
A poster session is a visual display of completed or in-progress work. In-progress work is only eligible for poster presentation. Individual abstracts and symposium abstracts are eligible for poster sessions. Symposia will be allocated one poster for each abstract, including the overview abstract. WIN will provide 4’ high x 8’ long poster boards for poster displays. Tables will not be available.
ELIGIBILITY and SELECTION CRITERIA
The abstract has not been presented or accepted for presentation at a regional or national meeting or accepted for publication by the abstract submission deadline (October 15).
Research, projects/best practices, and theory development/conceptual abstracts must be completed by the abstract submission deadline to be eligible for podium presentation either as individual papers or as part of a symposium. Abstracts that include statements such as “results will be presented” or “data will be analyzed” or “outcomes will be described” will not be considered for podium presentations. These papers will automatically be considered for poster presentation, however.
In-progress research or projects are eligible for poster presentation only. Completed research, projects, and theory development/conceptual papers are also eligible for poster presentation.
Abstracts of all papers should reflect or include:
- Internal consistency of Purpose/Aims and Methods;
- Clarity of presentation, including clear and compelling writing;
- Implications and Significance of the Study/Project/Theory for the discipline and nursing practice, including recommendations to translate findings into practice.
In addition, the Program Committee will use the following specific criteria when selecting abstracts for podium or poster sessions:
Research abstracts, including instrument development:
- Rationale/Conceptual Basis/Background
- Implications for Translation to Practice/Further Research/Policy
Theory Development/Conceptual abstracts:
- Description of Theory or Definition of Concept to Be Discussed
- Internal Consistency of the Theory Developed, Conceptual Approach, or Process Used
- Logic Linking the Theory or Concept to Nursing Practice or Research Problem
- Conclusions, including a Statement about the Utility of the Theory or Concept for Nursing Practice or Research
Methodological abstracts, including methodological studies, new use or critique of research method application and research-based best practices:
- Description of Method
- Internal Consistency of the Method
- Logic Linking the Method to Nursing Research Problem
- Conclusions, including a Statement about the Utility of the Method for Nursing Research
Project Papers, including activities that translate evidence to practice or generate practice-based evidence that is not meant to be generalizable outside of the agency/organization [e.g., quality/process improvement, needs assessment, program evaluation]:
- Brief Description of the Undertaking/Best Practice, including the Approach (including framework/model), Methods, or Process Used; include how improvement or change was measured or assessed if applicable
- Assessment of Findings/Outcomes Achieved
- Conclusions, emphasizing implications for policy, clinical or educational practices, and recommendations for research or future undertakings
Additional Selection Criteria for Symposium Sessions
Symposiums will be rated as a whole, and each abstract in the symposium must be scored high enough to be accepted. Even one low-scoring paper will result in the entire symposium being rejected. We recommend that authors collaborate closely to support the overall success of their symposium.
The Program Committee will score symposiums in accordance with the following criteria:
- Individual abstracts in the symposium will be scored using the above stated specific criteria for the type of abstract submitted;
- The degree to which the Overview abstract sets the stage for the symposium and its significance;
- The degree to which there is collective clarity of the abstracts that comprise the symposium;
- The importance of the symposium topic overall;
- The degree to which all of the abstracts in the symposium fit together.
A Word about Literature Reviews as Research
Narrative literature reviews/literature searches are generally not accepted for presentation, as they lack scientific merit (e.g. did not follow systematic approach or standardized guidelines (e.g., PRISMA), thus reducing rigor and reproducibility). To assist abstract submitters, the Program Committee offers the following information regarding appropriate work for submission. Systematic Reviews, Scoping Reviews, and Review of Reviews may be appropriate for presentation at WIN. All such reviews must demonstrate use of the appropriate methodology (following standardized guidelines). Meta-analyses and meta-syntheses that follow standardized guidelines are appropriate submissions for consideration. The methods used and the results need to be clearly presented as with any research abstract. For further information on review types see: https://guides.temple.edu/c.php?g=78618&p=3879604.
ABSTRACT SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
A link to the submission form is located at the end of this page. All completed submissions received by 11:59 PM Pacific time on Thursday, October 15, 2020 will be independently and blindly reviewed by the Program Committee and qualified WIN member volunteers. Selection of abstracts for presentation at the annual conference will be based upon scientific merit.
The body of your abstract must not exceed 500 words. All individuals involved in the study must be listed in the Authors section of the submission form. If the study was supported in full or in part by a grant, include the grant number and granting organization in the funding section on the Title page. References are discouraged.
The minimum number of abstracts for a symposium is three (3) and the maximum number is five (5), plus an Overview abstract. Authors should follow the format instructions listed above.
Symposium submissions must first include an Overview abstract that sets the stage for the symposium. The symposium organizer is responsible for writing and submitting the Overview abstract, coordinating the abstracts and providing developmental feedback to abstract authors, and coordinating the submission. Abstract authors are responsible for submitting their own finalized abstracts.
After first completing the Overview abstract, the symposium organizer will be prompted to enter each presenter’s name and email address, along with the title of each abstract in the symposium. This creates an abstract “shell.” An email will then be sent automatically to each presenter along with instructions. After receiving these emails, the abstract authors will follow the required steps to complete their abstract submission(s).
CE Application Information
We collect the required information for the CE application form at the time you submit your abstract(s). You will need to provide the following information when submitting your abstracts:
Learning Outcomes: State at least one learning outcome for each abstract.
Topics: Identify the related content (topics) and cite the evidence-based references used in developing the content.
Bioform: The bioform will be populated with information supplied when an abstract is submitted. In addition, each presenter will complete the Conflict of Interest (COI) statement, including an electronic signature, as part of their abstract submission. The abstract submission will not be complete until the COI form(s) are completed and electronically signed.
Those interested in being considered for the Carol A. Lindeman Award for a New Researcher should check the appropriate button on the abstract submission form.
Carol A. Lindeman Award for a New Researcher
Candidates for consideration as a recipient of the Carol A. Lindeman Award for a New Researcher must:
1. Be a new researcher (defined as a graduate student) or a nurse researcher no more than two years post highest degree;
2. Have assumed primary responsibility for conceptualization, design, and conduct for the report studied; and
3. Have an abstract for completed research selected by the Program Committee for podium presentation or as part of a symposium podium presentation.
Top 10 Reasons Abstracts Are Not Accepted
The WIN Program Committee has identified the Top 10 Reasons why research or project abstracts are not accepted. The Committee hopes this document will assist authors as they develop their abstracts.
1. Title does not summarize content
Sometimes clever titles or direct quotes from research participants are used in place of informative titles. It’s best if the title conveys the overall point of the abstract. The reviewer should know from the title what to expect from the rest of the abstract, without surprises or unfulfilled expectations. A surprised or confused reviewer will result in a poor score.
2. Research question or purpose is not clear or is not congruent with methods
Is the question you pose clear? If so, can it be answered with the methods you propose? If not, the lack of congruence will be a problem. State clearly the research question, what was done, who was in the sample, and how the data were analyzed.
3. Methods are not aligned with results
Be sure the methods produce the answers you report in the results section. If you submit a poster abstract of research still in progress, you do not need to report final results, but you do need to explain your methods and can include interim findings.
4. Results section fails to report results
Podium presentations require results to be available at the time of abstract submission. The expectation is that the results should be explained so that the reviewer can interpret and understand what you found. A statement like “Results will be presented” is not acceptable, and should be replaced with numeric results (and significance values) or qualitative findings appropriate to the methodology. The methods and results should comprise the greatest part of the abstract. If you have extra space, expand the methods and results sections. Note: Poster presentations do not require results.
5. Importance or significance of the topic to nursing is underdeveloped
If a community of nurses reading your abstract or attending the conference cannot appreciate the significance of your topic to their professional work, your abstract needs help. Ask yourself, “What about my abstract is important for nursing?” Be sure you connect your topic with your WIN audience.
6. Conclusions are not supported by the data
The abstract reviewer will compare the conclusions you identify to the data presented in the results. Over- or under-interpretation of the results is best avoided. Conclusions should be aligned with the original purpose of the abstract. Compare your conclusions to your purpose, title, and methods to be certain the links between these abstract sections are logical and explicit.
7. Implications for nursing research, practice, or education are not supported by results
The nursing audience will want to know how to use your findings. Guidance about the usefulness of your work is necessary in the abstract. It is assumed by abstract reviewers that future research is needed in most areas and that replication of results is wise before any single set of findings are widely adopted. There is no need to state those kinds of implications unless you have an explicit recommendation. Instead, focus on what you learned and what you would like other nurses to know in order to enhance research methods, provide better nursing care, change policy, or improve the education of future nurses.
8. Template headings are missing
WIN has three categories of abstract submissions. Each has a set of pre-defined headings and expected content. If you leave out a section heading and the corresponding content, it is difficult for peer reviewers to evaluate your abstract using the defined score sheet and will likely result in a poor score. Provide reviewers with the categories and information they expect. Read the instructions, believe the instructions, follow the instructions.
9. Grammatical errors and writing problems
If your abstract is not easily understood by the reviewers due to grammar or writing issues, your submission will be rejected. Simply having a colleague proofread your abstract will help identify writing problems. Grammar issues, such as changes in tense, incomplete sentences, or poor word choice can be remedied with some pre-submission peer or mentor feedback. Another method that may help identify problems is to read your abstract aloud to yourself; this technique will frequently catch errors not apparent when reading.
10. Jargon is confusing or undefined
An abstract (Abs.) rarely needs to use abbreviations (AB). AB is confusing, sometimes unfamiliar to reviewers, and often unnecessary. For example, in a 250-word Abs., AB may be used only a few times. Usually a space-saving ploy, AB can be eliminated from your Abs. if you write a better, tighter Abs. Similarly, some words are meaning-laden words-of-the-moment that have cropped up in science, yet are seldom uniformly understood by abstract reviewers from a variety of nursing specialties. Technical, theoretical, and contemporary jargon will require a brief conceptual and/or operation definition in your abstract.
Top 5 Reasons Your Symposium Was Not Accepted
The WIN Program Committee has provided some additional guidance on why symposiums are not accepted. This symposium focus is offered to assist symposium authors in preparing a submission.
1. The Symposium Overview abstract does not clearly identify the theme for the symposium.
Symposia are individual abstracts integrated into a whole by a common theme. The overview should clearly identify the theme (concept, method, population, etc) and briefly describe how each abstract illustrates the theme without duplicating content found in individual abstracts.
2. Abstracts do not “hang together”.
Abstracts do not fit together as described in the overview; i.e., one or more abstracts is only peripherally related to the topic and neither the overview nor the abstract make clear how it fits into the symposium or expands the topic. All abstracts must have a common thread that is tied to the theme of the symposium, further develops the theme, and represents a body of knowledge on the topic.
3. Abstracts are presented by too few authors.
Symposia present an exchange of ideas about a central theme by a panel of presenters. A symposium presented by only one or two presenters does not offer multiple views of the topic.
4. Too few or too many abstracts.
The symposium should have at least four abstracts (including the overview) and no more than six abstracts (including the overview). This ensures that the symposium will fit into the standard conference time slots.
5. One abstract receives a low score.
Each abstract in the symposium must be scored high enough to be accepted. Each abstract is scored using criteria for individual abstracts. Even one low scoring abstract will result in a symposium being rejected. See Top 10 Reasons Your Abstract Was Not Accepted.