April 13-15, 2023
Thursday-Saturday (with pre-conference activities on Thursday)
Larner College of Medicine at the University of Vermont
Call for Abstracts
General Overview
The Northeast Group on Educational Affairs (NEGEA) invites abstracts for interactive workshops, oral abstract presentations, and posters for the 2023 annual conference. Proposals may represent original research or innovations in medical education. Abstracts can focus on any level of medical or health professions education (UME pre-clerkship or clerkship, GME, CPD, HPE, faculty development, or across the continuum).
All abstracts must be submitted online no later than 11:59 p.m. ET on November 1, 2022. Proposals should be submitted online.
The submission site is now open!Â
We recommend that you prepare your proposal in a word processing application and then paste each component into the corresponding online section.
An abstract submission is considered a commitment to attend the meeting and present if accepted. Abstract decisions will be sent to the first author by the beginning of February 2023. All abstracts will undergo a peer-review process by three reviewers. Students, residents, fellows, and new investigators are strongly encouraged to submit their work.
For more information, please contact:
- Conference chair: Judith Brenner, MD
- Host chair: Kathryn Huggett, PhD
- Host chief administrator: Amanda Broder
- Abstract co-chair: Christopher Mooney, PhD, MPH
- Abstract co-chair: Sarah McCallum, PhD
- NEGEA chair: Steve Rougas, MD MS FACEP
Session Types
Research in Medical Education Abstract Proposal
Purpose: Includes works to promote dissemination and discussion of research and its application to medical education.
Time/Format: Submissions will be peer reviewed and selected for either poster or oral presentation. Presenting authors should be familiar enough with the project to discuss relevant literature, present findings and answer questions. Oral presentation is a short synopsis of the research, with a 10-minute oral presentation given by no more than two presenters, followed by a 5-minute question-and-answer period. Session moderators will keep presenters to 15-minutes to ensure all presenters have equal time. Poster presenters are expected to be available to discuss their research with session attendees at the poster session
Proposals are limited to 300 words and must include:
- Research statement/research question
- Background and/or theoretical framework and relevance of the study
- Design and methods
- Results of data collection and analysis
- Limitations
- Conclusions
Required but not included in 300-word count:
- Title
- Author(s) and affiliated institutions
- References
Proposals will be reviewed using the following criteria:
- Clarity of research statement/question
- Strength of background and/or theoretical framework and relevance of the study
- Strength of research design and methods
- Relevance of results
- Limitations and soundness of conclusions
- Clarity of writing
Innovations in Medical Education Abstract Proposal
Purpose: Includes works to promote dissemination and discussion of scholarly educational innovations and their applications to medical education.
Time/Format: Submissions will be peer reviewed and selected for either poster or oral presentation. Presenting authors should be familiar enough with the project to discuss relevant literature, present findings and answer questions. Oral presentation is a short synopsis of the innovation, with a 10-minute oral presentation given by no more than two presenters, followed by a 5-minute question-and-answer period. Session moderators will keep presenters to 15-minutes to ensure all presenters have equal time. Poster presenters are expected to be available to discuss their innovation with session attendees at the poster session
Proposals are limited to 300 words and must include the following components:
- Objective or purpose of innovation
- Background and/or theoretical framework and importance to the field
- Innovation design
- Evaluation Plan: methods and measures
- Outcomes
- Innovation’s strengths and limitations
- Feasibility and transferability
Required but not included in 300-word count:
- Title
- Author(s) and affiliated institutions
- References
Proposals will be reviewed using the following criteria:
- Clarity of innovation’s objective or purpose
- Clarity of what was novel, new or innovative
- Strength of background and/or theoretical framework and importance to the field
- Strength of evaluation plan (methods and materials)
- Relevance of outcomes
- Quality of reflective critique about the innovation
- Clarity of writing
Key Differences Between Research and Innovations
The table below summarizes some of the similarities and differences in Research and Innovation abstract submissions.
| Section | Research | Innovation |
|---|---|---|
| Background | Strong rationale with theoretical framework applied | Strong rationale with theoretical framework applied; What was new, novel or innovative? |
| Methods | Clear methods and data analysis | Emphasis on evaluation plan |
| Results | Results are complete and relevant | Outcomes are clearly defined |
| Conclusions | Sound conclusions and limitations discussed | Feasibility, sustainability, and transferability; Quality of reflective critique about the innovation |
Workshops
Purpose: Workshops are skill-oriented, interactive experience for learners which will allow them to take home specific knowledge and skills.
Time/Format: 75 minutes for the workshop by 1 or more presenters. It is expected that the workshop activities will include hands-on practice and/or active learning for a good portion of the workshop time.
Proposals are limited to 500-word abstracts and must include the following components:
- Rationale: Why the topic is important, its timeliness, and its relevance to medical education
- Learning Objectives: What participants will know or be able to do as a result of this session
- Session Methods and Format: Indicate amount of time to be allocated to each speaker or element of the program. Describe the format of the session and the methods that will be used to engage participants.
- Experience: In one sentence per speaker, describe the experience of the speaker(s).
Required but not included in 500-word count:
- Title
- Author(s) and affiliated institutions
Proposals will be reviewed using the following criteria:
- Importance, timeliness, and relevance of topic
- Clarity of learning objectives
- Clarity and appropriateness of session format and method (reader knows who is doing what)
- Appropriate format and methods to engage participants in session
- Interest potential
- Clarity of writing
Note about ratings for all abstract types
Rating Scale foreach criterion:
1=Poor
2=Below Average
3=Average
4=Above Average
5=Excellent
Overall Decision:
Accept (this is an excellent proposal, strongly support it being in the program)
Accept with Reservations; Please explain: (this proposal has strong qualities but is missing some important elements, would include in program only if space permits)
Reject; Please explain: (this proposal lacks many important elements, do not support it being on the program)
Additional information
- System will collect submitter’s contact information, presentation title, content domain, key words, intended audience, abstract type, as well as co-author contact information (including email)
Helpful resources
- Institutional Review Board (IRB) Consideration: While IRB review/approval is not required for regional meeting submission, it is encouraged that the IRB is consulted when starting research or scholarly projects. The Academic Medicine Last Page, Primer for Submitting Health Professions Education Research to the IRB, is a helpful resource for navigating your IRB. Access the Academic Medicine Last Page
- Abstract Composition: AMEE Guide no. 108: Writing competitive research conference abstracts is a helpful resource for writing research abstracts. Access the guide on PubMed