conference presentation author

• Open access
• Published: 05 June 2019

Good Practice for Conference Abstracts and Presentations: GPCAP

• Cate Foster   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6236-5580 1 ,
• Elizabeth Wager   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4202-7813 2 , 3 ,
• Jackie Marchington   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8482-3028 4 ,
• Mina Patel   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9357-1707 5 ,
• Steve Banner   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7852-9284 6 ,
• Nina C. Kennard   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8480-7033 7 ,
• Antonia Panayi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1997-3705 8 ,
• Rianne Stacey   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6516-3172 9 &

the GPCAP Working Group

Research Integrity and Peer Review volume  4 , Article number:  11 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

146k Accesses

23 Citations

54 Altmetric

Metrics details

Research that has been sponsored by pharmaceutical, medical device and biotechnology companies is often presented at scientific and medical conferences. However, practices vary between organizations and it can be difficult to follow both individual conference requirements and good publication practice guidelines. Until now, no specific guidelines or recommendations have been available to describe best practice for conference presentations.

This document was developed by a working group of publication professionals and uploaded to PeerJ Preprints for consultation prior to publication; an additional 67 medical societies, medical conference sites and conference companies were also asked to comment. The resulting recommendations aim to complement current good publication practice and authorship guidelines, outline the general principles of best practice for conference presentations and provide recommendations around authorship, contributorship, financial transparency, prior publication and copyright, to conference organizers, authors and industry professionals.

While the authors of this document recognize that individual conference guidelines should be respected, they urge organizers to consider authorship criteria and data transparency when designing submission sites and setting parameters around word/character count and content for abstracts. It is also important to recognize that conference presentations have different limitations to full journal publications, for example, in the case of limited audiences that necessitate refocused abstracts, or where lead authors do not speak the local language, and these have been acknowledged accordingly. The authors also recognize the need for further clarity regarding copyright of previously published abstracts and have made recommendations to assist with best practice.

By following Good Practice for Conference Abstracts and Presentations: GPCAP recommendations, industry professionals, authors and conference organizers will improve consistency, transparency and integrity of publications submitted to conferences worldwide.

Peer Review reports

Note on terminology

Company refers to any medical commercial organization involved with research, such as pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies and medical device manufacturers.

Company-sponsored refers to all types of research (preclinical and clinical, pre- and post-marketing) that is directly sponsored and/or funded by a company. While this classification does not necessarily include research performed under other types of funding arrangement, such as investigator-sponsored or investigator-initiated trials or research (where companies are not involved with conference presentations or publications), those involved in submitting investigator-initiated study material to conferences are encouraged to consider following these recommendations.

Conference is used to refer to meetings, often organized by academic societies, that invite submissions (usually as abstracts) presenting research findings on an aspect of medicine or science. Such conferences have a scientific (or programme) committee that reviews and selects presentations to be given at the meeting from the submitted abstracts.

Abstract refers to those submitted for consideration to scientific and medical conferences (see above).

Presentation refers to posters or slides developed from abstracts accepted for presentation at such conferences.

Lead author refers to the person who normally presents study findings at a conference and is usually listed as the first author. This is often the Principal Investigator.

Society sponsor refers to a member of the society that is holding the conference, who acts as sponsor (or guarantor) of a submitted abstract.

Presenting author refers to the person on the author list who attends the conference and presents the poster or abstract.

Non-author presenter or local presenter refers to a person who presents on behalf of the author group, but who is not listed as an author.

Introduction

Research that has been sponsored (see the ‘Note on terminology’ section for precise definitions of these terms) by commercial organizations (e.g. pharmaceutical, medical device and biotechnology companies) is often presented at scientific and medical conferences. These conferences are pivotal for the presentation of data from ongoing research projects and clinical trials to the relevant audience and are often the first opportunity to disclose and discuss potentially practice-changing data. They facilitate early communication of data long before publication of a full manuscript and also provide the opportunity to present results of additional analyses such as secondary and/or exploratory endpoints and post hoc analyses. However, while abstracts submitted to conferences are reviewed by a scientific committee for suitability and interest to the audience prior to acceptance, it is important to note that they are not considered peer-reviewed as they are not subject to the same rigorous peer-review process as are journal articles. Poster and oral presentations based upon accepted abstracts are rarely, if ever reviewed. Furthermore, a recent systematic review showed that less than 50% of all studies accepted as abstracts went on to be published in full following presentation at a conference [ 1 ]. While it is desirable to strive for full publication after a conference presentation to ensure transparency and allow healthcare professionals to make appropriate informed decisions based on the peer-reviewed literature, this is not always practical and/or achievable. Therefore, it is important that abstracts and conference presentations, particularly for company-sponsored research, are developed with as rigorous a process as that of a full publication, because these may ultimately become the only source for a particular analysis.

While there are recommendations on the preparation of journal articles and qualification for authorship [ 2 ], and guidelines for best practices in the publication of company-sponsored research [ 3 , 4 , 5 ], until now, no specific guidelines have been available to describe good practice and best principles for conference presentations. This has resulted in diverse practices and a lack of standard expectations for transparency and ethical approaches. Although some aspects of good practice in Good Publication Practice (GPP) [ 5 ] and in reporting guidelines such as CONSORT and PRISMA for Abstracts [ 6 , 7 ] can be applied to conference presentations, the most widely cited recommendations on authorship from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) relate exclusively to publications in peer-reviewed journals [ 3 ]. These recommendations were not designed for, and therefore are not fully applicable to, abstract submissions and conference presentations and are challenging to implement in practice. Building on the acceptance and recognition of the GPP guidelines (first published as GPP for Pharmaceutical Companies in 2003 [ 3 ], updated in 2010 [ 4 ] and most recently published as GPP3 in 2015 [ 5 ]), this article endeavours to extend their principles and to address challenges relating to the presentation of company-sponsored research at academic meetings. These recommendations, on Good Practice for Conference Abstracts and Presentations (GPCAP), focus on company-sponsored research (see the ‘Note on terminology’ section). However, they do not cover other company activities that may be linked to conferences (e.g. satellite symposia organized alongside scientific conferences, medical education and marketing activities) because these are governed by regional and national legislation or codes (e.g. EFPIA code of practice [ 8 ], FDA regulations [ 9 ]). As with the GPP guidelines, GPCAP focuses on the presentation of all types of company-sponsored research and the specific challenges surrounding this, rather than investigator-sponsored or investigator-initiated trials or research (where companies have no role in their presentation or publication), although many of the principles also apply to the presentation of other types of research at scientific meetings. The aim of GPCAP is therefore to provide guidance on good submission and presentation practice for scientific and medical congresses, specifically addressing certain aspects where current publication guidelines are inadequate.

These recommendations were developed after informal discussions among a group of individuals who have wide experience of working with authors to develop abstracts, posters and slides for oral presentations reporting company-sponsored research. The main impetus for this article arose from a meeting regarding GPP3 updates (with which some of the authors had been involved). Prior to this meeting, two authors had noted that even the revised GPP3 guidelines contained limited advice for conference abstracts and presentations. Meeting participants discussed the requirement for clearer guidance and formed a working group to address this gap. At this point, invitations to join the group were extended to potential authors known to have previously presented relevant research at meetings of the International Society of Medical Publication Professionals (ISMPP) or had a known interest in conference presentations. This also ensured a broader global representation and improved the balance between pharmaceutical and medical communication agency representation. The authors all work or have worked for pharmaceutical companies and/or medical communication agencies (see the ‘Competing interest’ section for specific details). After a search for recommendations and guidelines on this topic revealed nothing specific (either in ICMJE or in a search on EQUATOR), the authors developed an initial outline for this article; individuals worked on pre-agreed sections and then a collective review of the full draft, comprising all sections was completed (see ‘Authors’ contributions’ for specific details). The resulting article was posted as a preprint on PeerJ [ 10 ] on 19 October 2017 for open comment. All comments received (and their responses) can be seen with the preprint on the PeerJ website. These comments were used to revise the recommendations. Some authors invited informal consultation from colleagues, and a courtesy legal review, as appropriate, was completed to ensure compliance with employee company policies. The copyright section was reviewed specifically for appropriate interpretation of copyright law. In addition to the preprint, 65 medical societies and medical conference sites, and two for-profit companies that run conferences on behalf of societies, were contacted for comment via contact emails listed on their websites or via ‘contact us’ options found on their websites. The societies and conferences and conference service companies were selected by recommendation from within the author group, to ensure balance across therapeutic areas, geography and variety of website submission sophistication. Only one of these societies/companies responded. All comments received on the preprint by 10 July 2018 were collated and discussed, and this final version was generated. The preprint was viewed by 2769 unique visitors and downloaded 3300 times between 19 October 2017 and 25 March 2019.

The recommendations are given here by topic, and so there is some overlap by intention, to ensure that all the key elements for any given topic appear together and allow readers to browse by topic.

Recommendations

The following principles aim to cover the key areas relevant for submissions to any research-based conference.

Author listings should reflect those who did the research and can take accountability for its conduct, and for the analysis and interpretation of the findings. Criteria for authorship of conference abstracts and presentations should generally be the same as those for full publications, although there can be occasions where local presenters may be included as authors, for example, where a conference requires a presenter to be listed as an author.

All authors should be involved in the development, and approve the final version, of any abstract, poster or slides that bears their names. For studies involving large numbers of researchers it may be most efficient for a subgroup of those involved in the studies to develop conference abstracts and presentations (similar to the use of a writing group to develop publications from large studies).

Posters and slides should list key contributors and describe their contributions to the research and development of the presentation.

Study registration numbers (e.g. ClinicalTrials.gov , EudraCT, PROSPERO) should be included on abstracts, posters and slides.

All sources of funding for the research and its presentation, and any author conflicts of interest, should be disclosed on posters and slides, on the conference submission site, and if space permits, on abstracts.

Any medical writing support and associated funding should be acknowledged on posters and slides, on the conference submission site, and if space permits, on abstracts.

These recommendations are mapped against the development of an abstract and subsequent conference presentation workflow in Fig.  1 , referenced by section number.

Roadmap of recommendations following abstract and presentation development stages

Recommendations for conference organizers

Conference organizers should:

encourage the inclusion of contributor lists on posters and slides;

include a field for trial registration details on abstract forms (outside the word or character limit) and publish this information with the abstract;

include a field for sponsor information on abstract forms (outside the word or character limit) and publish this information with the abstract;

include a field for disclosing medical writing support on abstract forms (outside the word or character limit) and publish this information with the abstract;

use ORCID identifiers (individual researcher identifiers [ 11 ]) to identify authors and presenters;

not set arbitrary limits on the number of authors, and permit the use of study group names; and

distinguish between authors (meeting the ICMJE criteria) and any additional individuals (who are not authors or contributors) included in the submission, for example, as a result of a requirement for a society member to sponsor submissions. With limited space in any printed book of abstracts, this information might be restricted to appearing with the online version of the abstract.

1.0 Authorship

1.1 authors.

1.1.1 The author listing on conference abstracts and presentations should reflect the people who did the research or contributed substantially to the design of the study or to the interpretation of the results, and who were involved in the development of the presentation and who are willing to take responsibility for the findings. Authorship and author order should be agreed by all authors (see 1.1.5 for factors to consider). While the authorship criteria recommended by the ICMJE are widely used for journal articles [ 2 ], GPP3 recognizes that it may be necessary to adopt slightly different criteria for conference abstracts and presentations [ 5 ]. For example, while all named authors should review (at least once), approve the content of abstracts and presentations and be willing to take responsibility for the findings, it may be impractical to expect all authors to contribute to drafting and critically revising abstracts in the same way as for full manuscripts, because of the abstract brevity, time constraints, etc. There is an argument for limiting the authors to a number that can meaningfully comment and review an abstract (see 1.2.1) and using a study group to identify others involved in the wider study. Our collective past experience indicates that it becomes impractical for everyone to be involved in a group with more than 10 authors, which is also the maximum number suggested by GPP3 [ 5 ].

1.1.2 Authorship criteria for all anticipated journal articles and primary conference presentations should, ideally, be agreed at the start of the research, and author listings for subsequent secondary abstracts and presentations should be finalized well before work starts on the secondary material [ 12 ]. As with journal publications, whatever criteria are used to determine authorship should be applied equally to all authors, regardless of whether they are company employees, contractors, independent clinicians, researchers or consultants.

1.1.3 Authors and contributors should have access to all relevant study materials and data to permit them to understand the research findings. Abstracts may need to be developed soon after results are analysed and before a final clinical study report is available. In such cases, authors should always have access to the protocol, statistical tables and any other information necessary to discuss and develop the planned abstract and presentation.

1.1.4 If individuals are authors on abstracts and presentations written in languages in which they are not proficient, companies should work with them and offer whatever reasonable assistance is required to permit them to discuss and review material effectively (e.g. to provide translations for the authors, or a discussion with an interpreter or local investigator/presenter who can read and explain the text). Authors may also choose not to be listed for such a conference abstract and presentation (see also 1.1.6).

1.1.5 Whatever convention is (or will be) used to determine the order of authors on the related full publications in journals should generally also be used to determine the order of listing on conference abstracts and presentations. The final order should be agreed by all authors; however, conference requirements (e.g. listing the presenting author first) must be respected. In cases where first or last co-authorship is requested, the conference organizers should be contacted for guidance.

1.1.6 While the authorship of conference abstracts and presentations should accurately reflect those who were involved in the research, individuals who meet the ICMJE authorship criteria (and may be listed on a subsequent full publication) may choose not to be listed for a conference abstract and presentation (e.g. if they are unable to review and/or approve the material within the deadline). While this individual choice should be respected, significant contributions to the research should be acknowledged where possible; that is, in a contributor list included on the presentation.

1.1.7 Conference organizers should encourage the use of ORCID identifiers to identify authors on abstracts and presentations, to avoid ambiguity between authors with similar or identical names. (Note: many journals and institutions now require authors to include their ORCID identifier at manuscript submission.)

1.2 Contributors/study groups

1.2.1 We encourage conferences (and company sponsors) not to limit the number of authors (or contributors) who may be listed on an abstract or presentation, because this practice may prevent the author list from accurately reflecting who did the work. However, named authors should be limited to those who have actively participated in the development of the abstract (see 1.1.1). GPP3 recommends an author group of fewer than 10 [ 5 ]; above this number, naming a study group may be a more practical approach. Likewise, if the source data come from a study, and the authors involved in that study meet authorship criteria, then the use of a study group name is strongly recommended.

1.2.2 Study group names may be helpful to acknowledge contributions to projects involving a large number of people, in addition to named authors who have contributed both to the research and to developing the presentation. Inclusion of a study name, either in the title or by including a study group in the author listing, will facilitate linkage of conference abstracts and presentations with journal publications. However, this should not be a substitute for including a unique study identifier such as a registration number for clinical trials (e.g. ClinTrials.gov or EudraCT numbers), which is a more reliable linkage method because these can be used as search terms in relevant databases. Provision should be made for study group membership details to be added during abstract submission and made available via the conference website once an abstract has been accepted.

1.3 Presenters and society sponsors

1.3.1 While the ICMJE criteria are a useful starting point for determining authorship, they were not designed for conference abstracts and presentations. Therefore, in certain circumstances, and if all authors agree, it is permissible for somebody who does not (or will not) meet the ICMJE authorship criteria for a journal article to present findings at a conference. For example, a local presenter may be included (preferably in a contributor list and not as an author) if the authors of the conference presentation will not attend a particular meeting, do not speak the language required or are not members of the academic society hosting the meeting. This local presenter, for example, could be an investigator who recruited patients but did not contribute to the study design or interpretation of data and will not be involved in developing journal articles. In the contributor list, this person should be designated as ‘presenter’ to clarify their role. However, if the conference requires that only authors can present, then the new presenter will need to be added to the author list.

1.3.2 Abstract authors (including company authors) attending a conference should always be preferred as presenters over non-author presenters. In cases where an author is not available to present, and the conference acquiesces to a non-author covering the presentation, the non-author presenter should be familiar with the research design and findings and have a good knowledge of the subject area in order to respond to questions about the presentation even if, unlike the authors, they cannot take direct responsibility for the research. An appropriately qualified individual from the sponsoring company (e.g. Medical Director) could present study findings if authors are not available; however, individuals with a commercial role in the sponsoring company (i.e. sales or marketing) should not act as non-author presenters.

1.3.3 All those listed as authors on an abstract or presentation must be able to take accountability for the research (following the spirit of the ICMJE recommendations). Therefore, if conferences require a society member to sponsor a submission, and none of the authors or study investigators is a member, this sponsorship role should be distinguished from that of the study authors if the sponsor/member was not involved with the research. If an existing author happened to be a society member, then no such distinction would be necessary. If the conference wishes to list the society sponsor, then this role should be indicated on the abstract (e.g. by an asterisk) and in a contributor list (not the author list) on the presentation.

Figure  2 illustrates some scenarios to differentiate between authors and non-author presenters.

When is a presenter not an author? Different roles possible for authors and presenters of conference presentations

2.0 Conference abstracts

2.1 To facilitate linkage between conference abstracts and presentations, and subsequent publications, abstracts should include a study identifier such as a registration number (for clinical trials), study name, protocol number or grant number. To encourage this, conference organizers should require this information in a specific field on the submission form and publish it with the abstract.

2.2 Abstracts describing company-sponsored research should always name the sponsor and all funding sources (if more than the sponsor).

2.3 Authors or sponsoring companies may involve professional medical writers to support authors in the drafting of abstracts. All authors should agree to these arrangements and work closely with any writers and approve the final version. Space limitations on abstract submission sites usually preclude writing support acknowledgement. Conference organizers should consider requesting this information and publishing it with the abstract.

2.4 We encourage conference organizers to consider the requirements of reporting guidelines when setting limits on the length of abstracts. For example, CONSORT for Abstracts suggests that around 300 words may be needed to adequately report randomized clinical trials [ 7 ].

2.5 We also encourage conference organizers to maximize the available space for content in abstracts by not counting authors, affiliations, trial registration numbers and sponsor acknowledgments towards the word or character limit.

2.6 Most conferences will not consider reports of findings that have already been published in full (i.e. in a peer-reviewed journal). This requirement must be respected and, even if permitted, presenting findings after their full publication should be avoided. However, abstracts presenting findings or novel analyses that are not included in a full publication may be submitted if the conference permits this. In situations where a journal article is in preparation at the same time as abstract submission, subsequent submission of the article may overtake the abstract in acceptance, at which point the conference needs to be advised, and the journal also, to avoid issues of prior data release. It may be necessary to withdraw the abstract, or it might be possible for the journal and conference to come to a mutually acceptable arrangement regarding either delay of the article or amendment to the intended presentation. Posting summary results on a trial register (e.g. ClinicalTrials.gov , EudraCT) or a clinical study report to meet regulatory requirements is not regarded as full publication by the ICMJE [ 2 ] and should not prevent subsequent presentation at conferences.

2.7 As conference submission requirements become more detailed (and therefore labour-intensive), conference organizers should acknowledge that it is acceptable for the abstract submission process to be completed by a third party (e.g. a medical communications company) on behalf of the submitting author, with that author’s permission. Where feasible, the submission might be checked by the submitting author prior to the actual submission; however, there are some sites where submission has to be completed in one sitting, and on other occasions, time differences (and time pressures) may make this impractical.

3.0 Conference presentations (posters and slides)

3.1 general considerations.

3.1.1 Study identifiers (e.g., trial registration numbers) should be included on presentations to improve linkage between conference presentations and subsequent publications (see also Section 4).

3.1.2 All funding sources for the research, any assistance with the presentation (e.g. medical writing support, editorial assistance or design) or support for conference attendance and authors’ conflicts of interest should be clearly disclosed on posters and slides. For posters and slides, such disclosures should be clearly legible (i.e. not significantly smaller or lighter-coloured than the main text).

3.1.3 Author listing and order on posters and slides should be the same as that on the abstract. Authors should not be added to a presentation after the abstract is accepted. However, if an author is unavailable to work on a presentation after abstract acceptance, their name may be removed from the author list but their contribution (to the study and/or publication) should be acknowledged. If an author other than the first-named author is to present, this should be indicated without changing the author order. The principle is to retain the same information about authors as on the abstract for ease of identifying the related presentation. Similarly, the title of the presentation should not be changed after submission; thus, the titles of the abstract and poster or slides should be identical. [If someone not on the author list is to present, and this is known in time for poster preparation, the relevant name could be added as a footnote, or close to the author list thus: (Presenter: J. Doe, ABC Institute, City, Country).]

3.1.4 All named authors should contribute to the development of, and approve, the presentation (see 1.1.1). Authors should be given sufficient time for presentation development and review. Making significant changes to posters or slides after all-author approval should be avoided. If changes must be made after approval, the actual final version must be sent to all authors. As with journal articles, for large studies, it may be most efficient for a subgroup to coordinate the development of a presentation (similar to a writing group for an article). This should be considered when deciding authorship.

3.1.5 Each author’s contributions to the study and to the development of the presentation should be listed.

3.1.6 Conference presentations should include a list of contributors who have made a significant contribution to the research or the presentation, regardless of whether they are listed as authors or attending the meeting. Ideally, permission for such acknowledgment should be sought in writing.

3.1.7 Because abstracts are usually submitted several months before a conference, they may contain interim or preliminary findings. Therefore, by the time of the conference presentation, some details may have changed. If research findings change substantially between abstract submission and conference presentation and affect the conclusions of the research, we recommend that authors alert the conference to this discrepancy. This is particularly pertinent in the case of oral presentations (because abstracts are typically selected for oral presentations based on the impact of the findings). Regardless of whether the new data change the conclusions of the research, we recommend indicating (e.g. in a footnote) any data that are different from those on the accepted abstract.

3.1.8 Authors or sponsoring companies may involve professional medical writers in the production of posters and slides. Authors should agree to these arrangements and work closely with any writers, editors and/or designers throughout the development of the presentation. Such support should be disclosed on the presentation, along with source(s) of funding (see also 3.1.2).

3.2 Posters

3.2.1 While there are platforms where posters can be made permanently available (e.g. on conference websites or platforms such as F1000 Research), some journals regard this as prior publication which may jeopardize full publication. Authors should therefore check the policies of their target journal(s) and of the sponsor or funder before agreeing to a poster being publicly posted.

3.2.2 Posters are not peer-reviewed by conferences and may not describe all aspects of the research. Posters should therefore not be viewed as a substitute for a full article in a peer-reviewed journal. However, if a poster is publicly available (and, ideally, searchable via an indexing system or DOI), it may be cited until the full publication is available, although some journals consider citation of posters as unpublished information rather than full citations. See Section 6 for citation best practice.

3.2.3 The lead author should be given the first option to attend the poster session(s), but this role may be taken by other authors or a local presenter (if no author can attend or if no authors can present in the language of the conference). The poster presenter should ideally be agreed before the abstract is submitted, although it is understood that circumstances may change by the time of the actual conference (see 1.3.1).

3.2.4 While disclosures, funding sources, acknowledgements and contributions should be clearly noted on the main poster, supplementary sources can be used to expand on these if there is not enough room for detailed information, and may be accessed via a QR code (or similar link). Such content should normally be available until the research is published, in full, in a journal (at which point the link should be deactivated). If QR codes (or similar technology) are used to provide copies of the poster or to link to other scientific content, these should only be available to conference attendees, unless the conference elects to make the posters freely available after the conference. Links for the QR codes may be time-limited to close once the conference is finished. Supplementary materials may include translations. Supplementary material should be provided under the same usage conditions as the poster and indicate who is the copyright holder or licensee.

3.3 Slides for oral presentations

3.3.1 While the lead author is normally expected to present study findings at conferences (and is given the first option to do so), this may not be possible due to local language requirements, availability to travel, or personal circumstances, etc. If the lead author chooses not to present study findings, another author may give the oral presentation. If none of the named authors is available or able to give the presentation, a non-author presenter may present the findings if all authors agree to this and the conference permits it (see also 1.3.1 and 1.3.2). The presenter should be agreed before the abstract is submitted (and only changed if that person becomes unavailable). The lead author should discuss the contents of the presentation and the interpretation of the findings with the presenter (and co-authors, if possible) before the conference to ensure the authors’ views are correctly represented.

3.3.2 If a non-author presenter gives a presentation on behalf of the named authors (or study group), this should be indicated at the beginning of the presentation. The presenter’s conflicts of interest should be noted on the disclosure slide.

3.3.3 Recordings of oral presentations may be posted online by conference organizers but, as with posters, care should be taken to ensure this does not jeopardize full publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Slides alone (without the accompanying talk or speaker notes) may be hard to interpret and not provide full context, so care should be taken if these are made publicly available. As with posters (see 3.2.4), online sources may also be considered to host supplementary materials for presentations if they are made available after the presentation. If slides are made publicly available, this should not occur until after the presentation has been given and should only occur with the agreement of all authors and sponsors, who will need to consider any restrictions around the posting of the data and possible ‘prior publication’ concerns for later use (see 6.1.2).

3.3.4 Some scientific meetings offer Continuing Medical Education (CME) credit for attendance at oral presentations. Local regulations and requirements of the accreditation body for this must be respected.

4.0 Encore abstracts and presentations

4.1. It is permissible to present the same research findings at more than one conference if both the first and subsequent conferences allow this. This practice may be referred to as an ‘encore’ (or more specifically an encore abstract or encore presentation). However, presentations of the same findings to the same audience should be avoided.

4.2 Although encore abstracts are not considered to be redundant publications (unlike publication of the same findings in more than one journal), some conferences elect only to accept findings that have not been presented at other conferences, and such requirements must be respected.

4.3 When considering encore abstracts, the authors and sponsoring company should decide whether it is most appropriate to submit identical abstracts to multiple conferences or whether it is better to emphasize different aspects of a trial (e.g. those of interest to different audiences). Use of study identifiers can help identify that multiple conference abstracts and presentations are from a single study. However, to avoid any confusion, we recommend that encores should be specifically identified as such (e.g. by stating that the presentation is an ‘encore’ and listing where previous abstracts of all or some of the findings were presented) (see also 4.4 and 4.6). We also recommend that previous presentations should be listed on the presentation, if accepted.

4.4 Conference organizers should consider including a means of identifying encore abstracts (e.g. including details of prior presentations) on the abstract submission form. This information should not be included in the abstract word or character count.

4.5 Addition of new data to a previously accepted abstract may not necessarily constitute a new abstract: conference guidelines should be consulted to confirm if this is acceptable. If no specific guidelines are provided, then as a general guide, if the new iteration adds any new data other than an update on analyses already contained in a previous abstract, then the new iteration should be regarded as a new abstract.

4.6 Where encore abstracts, or updated abstracts that include previously presented data, are accepted, their presentations should indicate that this is not the first time of presentation, for example, by a statement on the poster or slides such as “Data/some data first presented at [conference name and date]”.

4.7 Encore checklist: When deciding whether to submit an encore abstract to a conference to reach different audiences, authors and study sponsors should consider the following points.

What is the overlap, if any, with the audience of the earlier conference (e.g. in terms of region, specialism or profession)?

Are there any differences in the licensing status of any products mentioned in the presentation between the first and subsequent conference locations? For example, if the first presentation occurred in a region where a product is licensed, but later presentation(s) will take place in a region where it is not yet licensed, this fact may need to be reflected. For international meetings, remember that participants will attend from several regions, so the licensing status in different countries should be clarified.

Presentation at multiple meetings might delay and/or potentially jeopardize the full publication of research in a peer-reviewed journal. Companies should consider whether resources would therefore be better spent on ensuring a timely submission to a journal rather than preparing several encore abstracts and presentations.

5.0 Copyright considerations

5.1 Copyright transfer or publishing licence agreements that are executed during the abstract submission process are common when abstracts are to be formally published (e.g. in a conference-specific journal issue). These agreements relate only to the abstract, not to any subsequent presentation, unless explicitly agreed otherwise.

5.2 Copyright in a presentation is normally held by the authors, unless they have assigned it either to the conference or the sponsoring company. Re-use of a poster (at a subsequent meeting or in another format, such as a poster book or handout) normally requires permission from the copyright holder(s). It may therefore be simplest for authors to assign usage rights to the sponsor company if encore presentations or other types of re-use are planned. If a company author is included, then the copyright for that individual’s contribution rests with the company (not the employee).

5.3 If a conference wishes to acquire usage rights for abstracts, slides, or posters, we recommend that the conference offers an open access option under a Creative Commons (CC) licence. We encourage the use of the least restrictive CC-BY licence, which will allow authors and sponsoring companies the usage rights for subsequent presentations, as well as future publications. If presentations contain third-party material to which the authors do not hold copyright, it should be the responsibility of the conference organizers to clear rights for any further usage. The authors cannot be expected to anticipate the future use of materials by the conference organizers.

5.4 As for any publication, permission must be sought for use of third-party copyrighted material (e.g. a figure) in a presentation (and again for any encore presentations). Material should not be altered simply to avoid having to obtain permission from the copyright holder.

5.5 Peer-to-peer presentation at a scholarly conference by a researcher is generally considered to be fair dealing (UK) [ 13 ] or fair use (USA) [ 14 ], which does not require copyright permission. Any other use of a presentation by a company outside the conference will most likely be considered commercial use, for which permission from the rights holder(s) will be necessary.

6.0 Citing conference material

6.1 References (or citations) in scientific texts provide readers with source or background material and are used to justify or support statements. To be useable, the referenced material must be both permanently accessible and reliable; therefore, citations to full publications in journals that apply rigorous peer review are the ideal. However, if citations are needed for research that has not yet been fully published in a peer-reviewed journal, abstracts that have undergone scientific review (and on the basis of that have been accepted for presentation by a conference) may be cited, especially if they have also been published in a journal and are therefore permanently accessible and discoverable. Abstracts should not be cited after the full (primary) publication has been accepted by a journal.

6.2 Posters and slides are not peer-reviewed by conferences and are often not permanently or widely accessible or discoverable. Citations to posters or slides should therefore be avoided (see 6.1). However, if a poster or slide set is publicly available (and, ideally, discoverable via an indexing system or DOI), it may be cited until the full publication is available (although some journals consider citation of posters or slides as unpublished information rather than full citations). Authors and sponsor companies should ensure that publishing posters or slides online does not jeopardize full publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

6.3 To avoid citing conference posters or slides, companies should consider other dissemination routes such as listing findings as ‘Data on File’ (i.e. an unpublished data package held by the pharmaceutical company, which then should be supplied to anyone requesting those data).

6.4 If specific findings that were presented at a conference are omitted from a journal article (e.g. because of space constraints), they could be made accessible as supplementary material.

These recommendations summarize the authors’ collective experience with a view to outlining the underlying principles for best practice and providing guidance on the practicalities for navigating conference requirements. We did consider whether some of our recommendations could be accomplished by amendments to company–author agreements, but decided that such recommendations for ‘good practice for author agreements’ were beyond the remit and scope of this article and that GPP3 [ 5 ] adequately covers this aspect of author–sponsor relationship. Many of these recommendations are drawn from the working group’s experience across a variety of disease areas and conferences. However, this is also a limitation, in that by the nature of the authors’ work, their experience lies in conferences and conference submission systems with strong industry involvement. We believe that these recommendations could be applied to any type of scientific/medical conference and are as relevant to academic research as to company-sponsored research. Conferences maintain their value to the scientific community by covering the latest research and providing a forum for discussion: this value must not be lost due to lack of transparency or ethics in the preparation and presentation of the new data. By following these recommendations, industry professionals, authors and conference organizers will improve consistency, transparency and integrity of publications submitted to conferences worldwide.

It is earnestly hoped that future input from conference organizers and societies, as well anyone involved in submitting research to conferences, will augment and strengthen these recommendations. We therefore welcome feedback via the website ( https://gpcap.org ).

Scherer RW, Meerpohl JJ, Pfeifer N, Schmucker C, Schwarzer G, von Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;11:MR000005.

Google Scholar  

ICMJE Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. Available at www.icmje.org . Accessed 14 May 2019.

Wager E, Field EA, Grossman L. Good publication practice for pharmaceutical companies. Curr Med Res Opinion. 2003;19:149–54.

Article   Google Scholar  

Graf C, Battisti WP, Bridges D, Bruce-Winkler V, Conaty JM, Ellison JM, Field EA, Gurr JA, Marx ME, Patel M, Sanes-Miller C, Yarker YE. Good publication practice for communicating company sponsored medical research: the GPP2 guidelines. BMJ. 2009;339:b4330.

Battisti WP, Wager E, Baltzer L, Bridges D, Cairns A, Carswell CI, Citrome L, Gurr JA, Mooney LA, Moore BJ, Peña T, Sanes-Miller CH, Veitch K, Woolley KL, Yarker YE. Good publication practice for communicating company-sponsored medical research: GPP3. Ann Intern Med. 2015;163:461–4.

Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, Schulz KF, The CONSORT group. CONSORT for reporting randomized controlled trials in journal and conference abstracts. Lancet. 2008;371:281–3.

Beller EM, Glasziou PP, Altman DG, et al. PRISMA for Abstracts: reporting systematic reviews in journal and conference abstracts. PLoS Med. 2013;10(4):e1001419. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001419 .

EFPIA Code of Ethics for Pharmaceutical Marketing. http://www.efpia-e4ethics.eu/usd/e4ethics.nsf/_/AFB7FD98CFCD31D5C125806E0043F1FE/%24File/farma_110039.pdf . Accessed 14 May 2019.

US Food & Drug Administration. Laws, regulations, guidances and enforcement actions. Available at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Surveillance/DrugMarketingAdvertisingandCommunications/ucm081617.htm . Accessed 14 May 2019.

Foster C, Wager E, Marchington J, Patel M, Banner S, Kennard NC, Panayi A, Stacey R. Good practice for conference abstracts and presentations: GP-CAP. PeerJ Preprints. 2017;5:e3356v1 https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3356v1 .

Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID). Available at https://orcid.org/ . Accessed 14 May 2019.

MPIP Five-step authorship framework. Available at https://www.mpip-initiative.org/5-step-framework.html . Accessed 14 May 2019.

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, s 29(1); s 30(1). Available at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents . Accessed 14 May 2019.

Copyright Law of the United States | U.S. Copyright Office. Available at https://www.copyright.gov/title17/ . Accessed 14 May 2019.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks go to Peter Llewellyn of Network Pharma, for hosting the meeting on GPP3 that acted as a catalyst for getting these recommendations underway.

No author has received payment specifically for the development of this article.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Watermeadow Medical, Ashfield Healthcare Communications, Witney, UK

Cate Foster

Sideview, Princes Risborough, UK

Elizabeth Wager

University of Split, Split, Croatia

Caudex, a McCann Health Company, Oxford, UK

Jackie Marchington

Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc, New Haven, CT, USA

Darwin Grey Communications Ltd, Oxford, UK

Steve Banner

Cello Health MedErgy, a Cello Health PLC Company, Farnham, UK

Nina C. Kennard

Shire International GmbH (now part of Takeda), Global Medical Affairs, Zug, Switzerland

Antonia Panayi

iMed Comms, Ashfield Healthcare Communications, Witney, UK

Rianne Stacey

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

CF raised the initial suggestion for guidelines, co-developed preliminary sections of text for the initial draft and discussed comments and revisions, reviewed all versions and approved the submitted version. EW drafted the Principles section and other portions of the text, discussed comments and revisions, reviewed all versions and approved the submitted version. JM consulted on the initial suggestion for these guidelines, drafted the Copyright section and other portions of the text, discussed comments and revisions, reviewed all versions and approved the submitted version. MP co-developed the foundation of the Encore Presentations section, discussed comments and revisions, reviewed all versions and approved the submitted version. SB consulted on the initial suggestion for these guidelines, assisted in the development of the initial draft, reviewed all subsequent drafts and approved the submitted version. NK drafted the abstract and other portions of the text, discussed comments and revisions, reviewed all versions and approved the submitted version. AP developed several sections with the author group, discussed comments and revisions, reviewed all versions and approved the submitted version. RS consulted on the initial suggestion for these guidelines, co-developed preliminary sections of text for the initial draft, discussed comments and revisions, incorporated feedback on the pre-print version, reviewed all versions and approved the submitted version. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cate Foster .

Ethics declarations

Authors’ information.

Cate Foster, Jackie Marchington, Steve Banner and Nina C Kennard work for medical communication agencies that provide professional medical writing or editing services to not-for-profit and for-profit clients.

Elizabeth Wager is self-employed and provides training, consultancy and editing services on medical publishing and publication ethics for pharmaceutical companies, medical communication agencies, publishers, universities and academic societies.

Mina Patel and Antonia Panayi work in Global Medical Affairs functions within the pharmaceutical industry.

Rianne Stacey worked for a medical communication agency (see above) during the majority of the time the work was done and now works at Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Oxford, UK, in a Global Medical Affairs function within the pharmaceutical industry.

The content and opinions expressed in the article are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the policies or practices of their employers.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Commercial affiliations are noted in the ‘Authors’ information’ section.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Foster, C., Wager, E., Marchington, J. et al. Good Practice for Conference Abstracts and Presentations: GPCAP. Res Integr Peer Rev 4 , 11 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-019-0070-x

Download citation

Received : 27 July 2018

Accepted : 26 April 2019

Published : 05 June 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-019-0070-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Research Integrity and Peer Review

ISSN: 2058-8615

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

APA Style 7th Edition: Citing Your Sources

• Basics of APA Formatting
• In Text Quick View
• Block Quotes
• Books & eBooks
• Thesis/Dissertation
• Audiovisual
• Conference Presentations

Standard Format

Formatting rules, various examples.

• Social Media
• Legal References
• Reports and Gray Literature
• Academic Integrity and Plagiarism
• Additional Resources
• Reference Page

Adapted from American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed).  https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000

• Date should match the date(s) of the full conference
• Conference Proceedings published in journal or book should follow the same format for a journal or edited book chapter

See Ch. 10 pp. 313-352 of APA Manual for more examples and formatting rules

• << Previous: Audiovisual
• Next: Social Media >>
• Last Updated: Apr 22, 2024 9:37 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/APA7th

Present Your Paper

Get ready to present your paper at a conference. A key part of the research and review process is presenting and defending your work in front of peers at a conference.

The first step in getting ready to present your paper is to determine what key message you want to communicate to your audience. Most conference presentations are 10-20 minutes long, so you will not have time to present all the details of your work. The objective of your presentation is to get people interested in your work, not to explain it to them fully.

Organize your talk with these tips:

• Begin by stating the purpose or goal of your research. Tell the audience why your work is important.
• Provide a very brief literature review. This will give the audience some context.
• Move on to the main points of your own research.
• Conclude by reiterating the importance of your research and emphasizing the key points.

Tips for Creating Presentation Slides

Remember that your slides do not have to tell the story on their own. Slides are meant to illustrate your work, not explain it entirely.

• Use graphics where possible. Limit text to phrases and bullet points, rather than full sentences.
• Once you have drafted your slides, record yourself practicing your talk with the slides so that you can identify areas for improvement.
• Be sure to stay within your time limit and leave time for questions from the audience.

Academic Conference Presentations

A Step-by-Step Guide

• © 2022
• Mark R. Freiermuth 0

Gunma Prefectural Women’s University, Tamamura-machi, Japan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

• Takes the presenter on a journey from initial idea to conference presentation
• Addresses topics such as abstract writing, choosing a conference, posters and online versus face-to-face presentations
• Based on the author's own experiences

1925 Accesses

25 Altmetric

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

Table of contents (9 chapters)

Front matter, next up on stage….

Mark R. Freiermuth

Conferences: Choose Wisely Grasshopper

Getting started: the precise abstract, after the excitement fades: preparing for the presentation, tea for two or more: the group presentation, conferences: live and in-person, ghosts in the machine: the virtual presentation, the seven deadly sins: what not to do, the top five, back matter.

• English for Academic Purposes
• public speaking
• research presentation
• academic skills
• conferences
• poster presentations

About this book

This book provides a step-by-step journey to giving a successful academic conference presentation, taking readers through all of the potential steps along the way—from the initial idea and the abstract submission all the way up to the presentation itself. Drawing on the author's own experiences, the book highlights good and bad practices while explaining each introduced feature in a very accessible style. It provides tips on a wide range of issues such as writing up an abstract, choosing the right conference, negotiating group presentations, giving a poster presentation, what to include in a good presentation, conference proceedings and presenting at virtual or hybrid events. This book will be of particular interest to graduate students, early-career researchers and non-native speakers of English, as well as students and scholars who are interested in English for Academic Purposes, Applied Linguistics, Communication Studies and generally speaking, most of the Social Sciences. With that said, because of the book’s theme, many of the principles included within will appeal to broad spectrum of academic disciplines.

-Sarah Mercer , Professor for Foreign Language Teaching and the Head of the ELT Research and Methodology Department, University of Graz, Austria

Authors and Affiliations

About the author.

Mark R. Freiermuth  is Professor of Applied Linguistics at Gunma Prefectural Women's University, Japan. 

Bibliographic Information

Book Title : Academic Conference Presentations

Book Subtitle : A Step-by-Step Guide

Authors : Mark R. Freiermuth

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21124-9

Publisher : Palgrave Macmillan Cham

eBook Packages : Social Sciences , Social Sciences (R0)

Copyright Information : The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022

Hardcover ISBN : 978-3-031-21123-2 Published: 05 January 2023

eBook ISBN : 978-3-031-21124-9 Published: 04 January 2023

Edition Number : 1

Number of Pages : VII, 159

Number of Illustrations : 45 b/w illustrations

Topics : Applied Linguistics , Research Skills , Career Skills , Sociology of Education

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Site-wide Search

Search resources, products, articles and pages by keyword. For more detailed resource searches, use our advanced resource search .

• CanChild Home Page

Guidelines on authorship of abstracts, presentations and papers

To provide a clear understanding of what constitutes 'authorship' and the order in which authors should be recorded.

To ensure that those staff, students and research collaborators who participate in research activities with CanChild are acknowledged and their contributions are fairly and appropriately represented.

To develop a guideline which is CanChild-wide and which is flexible enough to accommodate variations inherent in publication patterns across different research projects, meeting presentations and across different journals.

What constitutes authorship

Authorship is usually attributed to persons responsible for the intellectual content of a published work. In the context of articles arising from a research study authorship requires ongoing (rather than occasional) contributions to the study AND actual writing/critical review of the paper. It should be noted that authorship of a research output is a matter that should be discussed at the earliest stages of a research output and re-assessed at any time that there is a change in participation or roles.

Definition: "Authorship is reserved for persons who receive primary credit and hold primary responsibility for a published work” (APA Publication Manual, 2001). At CanChild we believe it encompasses not only those who do the actual writing but also those who have made substantial scientific contributions to a study that lead to the presentation or publication.

Recognizing that research groups at CanChild meet regularly and generally provide intellectual/methodological input ongoing, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE, 1997) guidelines have been modified for our purposes as follows:

Authorship credit should be based on meeting all four of the following conditions

1. Substantial contribution to the study

• Conception and design, (eg. Co-investigator, consultant or research support staff who have intellectually contributed to the grant proposal) OR
• Clinical or methodological support throughout the implementation of the study (generally through participation in regular team meetings) OR
• Analysis and interpretation of data

2. Provide important intellectual contribution towards the conceptualisation or writing and reviewing multiple drafts of the article or abstract in a timely fashion.

3. Final approval of the version to be published (or may waive final approval at a point where no more substantial changes are to be made).

4. Are prepared to take public responsibility for the paper.

Persons who have not contributed in all of the above ways should not be included in the authorship list. No person should be either included or excluded from authorship without negotiation and the agreement of all parties concerned.

• All co-authors should acknowledge their contributions in writing. This acknowledgment should be placed on a file to be managed by the lead author for the specific publication or presentation.
• Acknowledgment of other contributions of a less substantial nature may be determined by negotiation between authors. These contributions usually include supportive functions such as designing and maintaining apparatus, statistical advice, data collection, administrative support and data entry. The usual practice is for these contributions to be cited as acknowledgments or in a footnote.
• For contributors who are recognised as paid consultants to the research output, their inclusion as authors is usually left to the discretion of the research team. According to common practice however, consultants who contribute substantially to the intellectual content of the publication are normally included as authors. Those consultants who contribute in a less substantial manner or whose contribution does not add to the intellectual content of the publication (eg: standard statistical analysis) are not normally included as authors, but are acknowledged in the work. Under no circumstances should these contributors be excluded from acknowledgment unless they specifically desire exclusion. Some journals require and people should consider asking people prior to acknowledging them in a publication.

Order of Authorship

• The principal investigator of the study is responsible for keeping track of all contributors (and potential authors). The PI should make a reasonable attempt to ensure that anyone who may feel that they deserve authorship be made aware of planned papers, presentations in order to negotiate a possible authorship role. It is up to team members who leave the group for whatever reason to negotiate with the PI (on behalf of the study team) any future roles within the project and keep the team updated of their interest and how to contact them.
• The principal investigator of a study is responsible for initiating a discussion / strategy for determining authorship order for the primary paper and proposed papers emanating from research projects prior to the writing process. This should be done early on in the study to ensure all participants are clear about what is required to be an author and what strategy will be used for deciding authorship order.
• The first author of an individual paper is responsible for initiating the discussion of authorship order for that paper. All authors should be involved in the decision making process, but the final order is ultimately the responsibility of the first author.

Possible strategies include:

• The order of authorship could be determined by the intellectual input from each of the authors. The researcher who makes the largest contribution, in terms of intellectual content, is listed as the primary author. Subsequent authors are listed in order of decreasing contribution.
• Authors, by general agreement, may wish their names to be listed in alphabetical, reverse alphabetical or random order. This is acceptable as long as each member of the party gives consent. The method is then made explicit in the publication (eg. by stating, “All authors contributed equally and are presented in alphabetical order”).
• The name of the group may be provided as author.1
• A formal weighting strategy may be used to rank authors based on specific contributions.2
• In accordance with the 'spirit' and flexibility of CanChild, there is recognition that there may be many variations in the strategies used to establish order of authorship within various projects (see the Authorship guidelines binder for ideas/suggestions). The method chosen is determined only by the condition that all authors must be involved in any negotiating process.
• An appropriate time frame to complete the paper should be negotiated with the co-authors for people who wish to take on the role of first author. If the person has not made reasonable attempts to meet this target they may loose the opportunity for first authorship and the authorship order may be re-negotiated.
• If someone feels they want to appeal the authorship decisions made by the first author they should indicate to the first author their intention and work with the first author to find a person who is mutually agreeable to both parties and who can objectively re-evaluate the decision.
• It is the responsibility of the first author to let the others know in writing when something has been accepted along with the complete reference for co-author’s curriculum vitae.

Student as Authors

• Early in the collaboration between faculty and students, the supervisor should provide the student with information related to how authorship decisions are made.
• Faculty and student should participate in discussion and make a reasonable agreement based on the specific abilities of each party on what tasks, contributions, and responsibilities, and extent of supervision necessary to complete the scholarly publication or presentation.
• Under the guidance of their supervisor, students who participate in a research project are required to negotiate their role with the entire research team early on in their involvement including expectations of team members and expectations for authorship. Written documentation of agreement should be kept as reference.
• The agreement between faculty and student needs to be as clear as possible and outlines the tasks, contributions and efforts required to warrant authorship by each party (may include a written agreement).
• Students will normally be primary authors on research publications that arise from their masters or doctoral thesis work provided they meet journal requirements and the CanChild guidelines.
• Students who undertake a research internship as part of a professional degree will normally not be first authors on publications arising from this work except when they meet all the criteria for first authorship. They should be recognized as co-authors provided they meet the journal requirements and the CanChild guidelines.
• Supervisors may only be included as a co-author on a research student's publication if they meet the above mentioned authorship criteria.

(Note: an excellent discussion of potential ethical issues when dealing with student-faculty collaboration is found in Fine & Kurdek (1993))

Authorship Etiquette

• It is the responsibility of the first author to be clear when sending a paper for review by colleagues what the expectations are for the reviewer. Is the paper being sent for the reviewer to provide feedback (conceptual and/or editing) with the expectation that the reviewer will be an author or is it for information only?
• In light of the authorship criterion that all authors need to have provided feedback on the manuscript it is necessary to discuss and agree upon a time frame for feedback on the manuscript with all parties involved. Generally two weeks should be reasonable, however, this could vary with specific circumstances.
• Anyone who cannot meet the decided upon time frame must correspond with the primary author and negotiate their role.
• Abstract submissions, book chapters, presentations etc. should have similar agreements.

Copyright Considerations

Articles posted on the web are considered “published material” and may jeopardize its consideration for publication as original material for a journal.

Prior to assigning copyright to a journal for an article you may wish to negotiate for written permission to reprint tables which you may need for other purposes (eg. If you are preparing a manual and want to reproduce tables from the journal article).

All presentations and handouts should have a copyright symbol on them in order to ensure appropriate credit if the information is subsequently used by others.

American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Diguiusto, E. (1993). Equity in authorship: A strategy for assigning credit when publishing. Social Science and Medicine, 38(1), 55-58.

Fine, MA. & Kurdek, LA. (1993) Reflections on determining authorship credit and authorship order on faculty-student collaborations. American Psychologist. 48:1141-1147.

Goldsmith, C. H., Cardiel, M. H., Clark, P. et al. (2002). Authorship Attribution. Unpublished manuscript, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.

Internal Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (1997). Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. Annals of Internal Medicine, 126, 36-47.

University of Wollongong. (2003). Policy on Authorship. Retrieved from University of Wollongong, Australia Web site: http://www.uow.edu.au/research/current/authorship.html (November 23, 2003)

http://canchild.ca

• Event Website Publish a modern and mobile friendly event website.
• Registration & Payments Collect registrations & online payments for your event.
• Abstract Management Collect and manage all your abstract submissions.
• Peer Reviews Easily distribute and manage your peer reviews.
• Conference Program Effortlessly build & publish your event program.
• Virtual Poster Sessions Host engaging virtual poster sessions.
• Customer Success Stories
• Wall of Love ❤️

How to Write a Speaker Bio for a Conference (with Examples)

Published on 28 Jul 2022

Author bios, or speaker bios, can be used for a variety of purposes. They can be included as part of your application to present at a conference or posted to an event website to introduce yourself as a presenter at the event. Bios can also be helpful to have on your profile in the participant directory of the conference management tool used for the event, so that others to know what you’re working on. 

For many, an author bio is their first introduction to their peers – sort of like a digital, written handshake. In the world of academic conferences, conference programmes and websites will include a biography of every speaker.

An interesting, engaging bio can help encourage others to participate in the event, and impact the number of people who attend your presentation, so it’s important to take your time, do your research, and write a biography that will highlight the characteristics that set you apart from the rest. 

How do you write a good short bio?

Start by taking notes of your strengths and accomplishments. Look at your CV and pull out the very basics like where you went to school and your primary area of interest, then add in the impressive details like fellowships, published pieces, or exciting collaborations.

Here are the detailed steps to take to write a bio that will inspire your peers to attend your presentation or connect with you in a breakout session.

Step 1: Find out the required length

When you’re writing a speaker bio for a specific conference, make sure you know the length of bio the organizer is looking for. Each conference will have its own guidelines, and some will even ask for two versions – a longer one for the event website and a shorter one for the printed program. 

Step 2. Write in the third person

Write your bio as if you’re writing it about someone else. Not only is this the most common format for a speaker biography, but it gives you the opportunity to add many details of your success and experiences without coming across as pompous or arrogant. Writing in the third person gives some authors more confidence to speak about themselves and their accomplishments. 

Start out with your full name, then decide whether to refer to yourself throughout using your first name or last name. For less formal events, using your first name creates an air of familiarity, while referring to yourself by your last name is more professional and formal. 

Step 3: Make a list of the basics

There are basic pieces of information that should be included in every speaker's biography.

• Your full name
• Your credentials
• Where you completed your graduate studies
• Your current position and where you work
• Your areas of interest
• How your experience is relevant and beneficial to the focus of the event
• Your most notable accomplishments - avoid building a laundry-list of published pieces, focus on the most impressive
• If you’ve published in any top peer-reviewed journals like Science, Nature, or the equivalent for your field, be sure to include this 
• List any patents you hold or any breakthrough findings
• Note any impressive research collaborations with well-known subject matter experts

Step 4: Write to your audience

Get to know your audience before you start writing. I don’t mean get to know them personally – that will happen at the event. I mean get an understanding of the demographics and areas of interest of the potential conference attendees that will be reading your bio. 

If you’re presenting at an ornithology conference and your audience is passionate about hands-on research, focus the content of your bio more heavily towards your applied experience studying birds. You can do this by highlighting the hands-on research you’ve done rather than the degrees and certifications you’ve earned. In this example, when discussing your PhD thesis, you would focus on the part of your research that led you to travel to Antarctica to study the Wandering Albatross migration. 

If your audience is made up primarily of institutional academics, highlight who funded your research and which institutions you were collaborating with when the work was being conducted. For example, focus the mention of your PhD thesis around the fact that you studied at UCLA under one of their many renowned Professors of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. 

Step 5: Add some personality

One way to set yourself apart from other speakers is to inject some fun into your bio. You want it to be interesting and engaging – that’s how you will encourage other conference attendees to read the biography from start to finish. Don’t be afraid to try out some wordplay or alliterations. While there are great bios that start out with the speaker’s primary research area, some of the most engaging bios start off with a sentence or statement that is bold, unexpected, and captures your reader’s attention. 

Examples of speakers' bio

Here are two good examples of the type of speaker’s biographies you’ll find on conference websites and programs. 

Brandon Farbstein

Brandon Farbstein’s bio is short, it’s interesting, and it opens with information that highlights the attributes that set him apart from other speakers. It gets personal and draws the reader in. Personally, if I saw this bio in a conference program I would definitely make time in my schedule to attend this presentation. 

“At just 20, Brandon Farbstein has already made a name for himself worldwide as a sought-after speaker and prominent Gen Z activist. Diagnosed with a rare form of dwarfism at the age of 2, Brandon stands at 3’9” – making his life’s journey full of adversity, strength, and impact. After feeling invisible and without a purpose for the first 15 years of his life, he discovered his calling on the TEDx stage, and suddenly realized his life’s meaning: to change the lens through which people see their world.  In just three years of speaking, over five million people across the globe have been inspired by Brandon; and his work continues to touch audiences from every walk of life.”

One notable thing lacking here is clear information about Brandon’s work. We know a lot about him personally, we know that he’s a TEDx speaker, and we know that his work has impacted millions of people, but we really don’t know what he actually does. 

Nicole Redvers

Nicole Redvers' bio starts by identifying her personal connection to her field of study, peaking the interest of readers and making it clear that she is passionate about her work. She goes on to cover her specific area of research, the institutions she’s connected with, and the advocacy works she’s involved with to advance her research in a way that will improve the lives of others. 

“Dr. Nicole Redvers, ND, MPH, is a member of the Deninu K’ue First Nation in Denendeh (NWT) and has worked with Indigenous patients, scholars, and communities around the globe her entire career. She is an assistant professor in the Department of Family and Community Medicine and the Department of Indigenous Health at the University of North Dakota where she helped develop and launch the first Indigenous health PhD program. Dr. Redvers is co-founder and current board chair of the Canadian charity the Arctic Indigenous Wellness Foundation based in Yellowknife, NWT, providing traditional Indigenous-rooted Land-based wellness supports to northerners. She has been actively involved at regional, national, and international levels promoting the inclusion of Indigenous perspectives in both human and planetary health research and practice. She is author of the trade paperback book titled, ‘The Science of the Sacred: Bridging Global Indigenous Medicine Systems and Modern Scientific Principles’.”

One thing I like about this bio is that it takes the reader through a logical flow of information that ends with Redvers’ most notable accomplishments. 

A good speaker's bio is short, direct, and sparks interest. It provides the speaker with an opportunity to connect with conference attendees before the event begins, and it provides event attendees with an introduction to the speakers presenting at the event which will help them determine which presentations they want to attend.

With the instructions we provided and half an hour of your time, you’ll have a bio that stands out from the rest!

5 Best Event Registration Platforms for Your Next Conference

By having one software to organize registrations and submissions, a pediatric health center runs aro...

5 Essential Conference Apps for Your Event

In today’s digital age, the success of any conference hinges not just on the content and speakers bu...

Student Perspectives: AERA Conference Presentations

Last month, a group of DSAN students, led by Dr. Britt He, attended the prestigious AERA Conference in Philadelphia. Second-year students Kefan Yu and Yiming Chen presented their work, while fellow students from Dr. He’s Adaptive Measurement class volunteered their time and talents. Read on to hear about Yiming and Kefan’s experiences in their own words.

* Responses lightly edited for length and clarity

Yiming Chen

It was a great pleasure to have the opportunity to present my research paper, titled “IdentifyingRobust Classifiers of Sequential Process Data in Adult Digital Literacy Tasks: A Machine Learning Approach,”. I would love to express my genuine gratitude to the initiation of the capstone project class at DSAN and especially to Professor Britt for her invaluable guidance and support throughout the research process. Without the support and mentorship from Professor Britt, attending such an esteemed conference wouldn’t have been possible.

Participating in the conference and presenting my work during the roundtable session was an enriching experience, which expanded my perspective within the field of education.Immersed in various sessions, I delved into topics ranging from process data analysis to education policy and quantitative measurement methods. I discovered the predominant importance of tailoring presentations to specific audiences, ensuring that individuals with diverse research focuses can comprehend the significance of my work and provide their valuable feedback. As a result, I have obtained precious insights that will influence and enhance my future endeavors in both research methodology and presentation preparation.

Engaging with professors, scholars, and researchers from diverse institutions during sessions and receptions provided a platform to exchange experiences and get insights into their perspectives on my research study. The opportunity to ask questions and receive feedback from experts within my field was beneficial, offering me a more comprehensive understanding of my study from various points.

My participation in the AERA conference has been an unforgettable journey. Marked by both academic discovery and personal growth. I would love to give my sincere gratitude again to my professors, my supervisor, my classmates, and the whole DSAN community for their unwavering support and encouragement. This experience has greatly strengthened my passion for research and sparked my further enthusiasm for contributing to the advancement of the educational measurement field.

I am honored to have had my proposal accepted by the Division-D Methodology section of the AERA Conference. This provided me with the opportunity to present my project alongside Professor Qiwei Britt He during a poster presentation session.

As a student in the DSAN program, I have been deeply involved in several academic projects focusing on statistical modeling and measurement. While I have routinely shared findings with professors and fellow DSAN students, presenting at this conference is my first experience addressing a gathering of professional researchers and representatives from prominent educational institutions. The opportunity to present was exciting; it allowed me to exhibit the algorithms and techniques I have mastered throughout my studies. More importantly, the conference served as an important platform for networking and knowledge exchange.

Engaging with experts from various fields, including educational policy, was particularly enlightening. For example, discussions about how to translate research findings into actionable policy changes or adapt them to different international countries has provided me with invaluable perspective on the practical applications of my work, which I seldom consider in my school projects.

Furthermore, the ability to explain complex data science concepts to an audience without a technical background has not only enhanced my communication skills but also deepened my understanding of the subject matter. It is through these exchanges that I can see the tangible impact of my research on diverse communities.

This experience not only allowed me to showcase my academic progress but also facilitated significant professional growth through interactions with scholars and practitioners. The insights gained from these interactions are instrumental in refining my approach to educational research and will influence my future career in the field of educational measurement.

• Hamersly Library

APA Style Guide 7th Edition

• Conference Papers/Presentations
• About This Guide
• Direct Quote
• Block Quote
• Indirect Quote
• Summary/Paraphrase
• Tables/Graphs/Images
• Personal Communications
• Book/E-book
• Journal Article
• Website/Webpage
• Social Media
• Thesis and Dissertations
• Video/Film/TV
• Music/Audio
• Visual Works
• Student Paper Guidelines
• Professional Paper Guidelines
• Creating Original Tables, Graphs, and Images
• Additional Help

GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS ANd Papers  

Conference Sessions and Presentations

Author Last name, First Initials. (Year and Date of Conference ). Presentation  title  [description]. Name of  conference, location. DOI or URL if available. 

Paper Published in Proceedings 

Author Last name, First Initials. (Year). Article title. In Editor First Initial, Last Name (Ed.)  Name of Proceedings (Page numbers). DOI or URL if available. 

EXAMPLES 

Conference Session

Lippold, S., Rach, J. & Fritsch, A. (2020 February 13-14).  Study program development: Building a bridge          between tradition and innovation - An unusual approach  [Workshop session]. 2020 European Learning          & Teaching Forum, Utrecht, Netherlands . 

Poster Presentation  

Ofori, E. & Wu, D. (2018 February 14-16). Video-based learning: Understanding usability, benefits, and           perception of using online educational videos [Poster session]. 2018 Conference on Higher Education           Pedagogy, Blacksburg, Virginia.    

Pap er Published in Conference Proceedings

Both, L.E. (2019) Why are some people optimistic while others are not?   In C. Pracana & M.           Wang (Eds.),  Psychological Applications and Trends 2019  (pp. 33-37). InScience Press.

          https://doi.org/10.36315/2019inpact008 

NOTES ABOUT AUTHOR, DATE, TITLE, AND SOURCE 

Author 

• List each author alphabetically by the authors last name and first name initial(s) in the order they appeared in the article.  Do not include titles, positions, or ranks in the authors name.
• Include the first 20 authors. If you have more then 20 authors include the first 19 and then et al. for the remaining authors. 
• Separate the authors by commas and the ampersand "&" sign. 
• For conference sessions and poster presentations, in parentheses  put the year first, followed by the month and days of the conference separated by a comma. For Example: (2020, July 18-21). 
• For papers published in conference proceedings, just list the year in parentheses.  

Presentation Title 

• For conference sessions and poster sessions, italicize the title. Include in brackets, the type of session.  
• For papers published in conference proceedings, use regular font. 
• The first word of the title and subtitle is capitalized as are proper nouns but all other words are lowercase. 
• If a title ends with a question mark or exclamation point, use those punctuation marks instead of a period at the end. 

Conference Title

• For conference sessions and poster sessions, use regular font for conference title.
• For papers published in conference proceedings, italicize the conference proceedings title. 
• Capitalize all major words.  
• List the Editors first initial and last name adding (Ed.) for one editor or (Eds.) for multiple editors after the last name, first initials of the last editor listed.  

Page Numbers 

• For conference proceedings, list the page numbers in parentheses. For example (pp. 125-145). 

Publisher 

• For conference proceedings, list the name of the publisher. 

DOIs and URLs 

• Include the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) if there is one available
• Omit the DOI if an article doesn't have one 
• If an online work has a DOI and a URL, use the DOI 
• Present the DOI as a web address. Precede the DOI number with https://doi.org/                                                           For Example: https://doi.org/100.1177/0013916518806686
• For online only sources without a DOI include the URL if available. 
• << Previous: Social Media
• Next: Thesis and Dissertations >>
• Last Updated: Jul 16, 2021 2:43 PM
• URL: https://research.wou.edu/APA7

• Introduction
• Formatting Your Paper
• In-Text Citations
• Books and eBooks
• Business Reports
• Conference Presentations and Publications
• Dissertations and Theses
• Government Documents, Statutes, and Court Cases
• Images and Advertisements
• Missing Information
• Multiple Authors
• Personal Communications (E-mails, Interviews, etc.)
• Previous Coursework
• Religious Works
• Secondary Source/Indirect Citation (as cited in)
• Social Media
• Video and Audio
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Annotated Bibliographies
• Get Help Now

APA 7th Edition Citation Guide Conference Presentations and Publications

Conference presentation.

For conference presentations, include the presenters' names, the dates of the entire conference, the title of the presentation, a description of the presentation, the name of the conference, the location of the conference, and a link if it is available.

The description of the presentation is flexible and should be included in square brackets after the title: e.g. [Conference presentation], [Poster session], [Keynote address], [Paper presentation], etc.

Reference Page Format:

Presenter, P. P. (Year, Month Days). Title of the presentation [Description of the presentation]. Title of Conference. City, State, and Country where the conference took place. Hyperlink.

Reference Page Example:

Sanentz, S. N., & Lesk, M. (2015, November 6-10). Toward a semantic stability index (SSI) via a preliminary exploration of translation looping [Poster session]. 78th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Information Science with Impact: Research in and for the Community, St. Louis, MO, United States. https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2857143

In-text Citation Examples:

Sanentz and Lesk (2015) shared that ... ...( Sanentz & Lesk,  2015 ).

Conference Publication

Conference publications can vary in how they are formatted, generally being published in the form of journal articles, whole books, or book chapters. Determine which option best fits the source you found and cite it as you would a journal article , book , or book chapter . 

Below is an example of a conference publication formatted similarly to a chapter in a book.

Author, A. A. (Year of Publication). Title of article.  In A. A. Editor, Title of conference proceeding. Publisher.  DOI or URL

Erdelez, S., Howarth, L. C., & Gibson, T. (2015). How can information science contribute to Alzheimer's disease research? In  Proceedings of the 78th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Information science with impact: Research in and for the communit y .  Association of Information Science and Technology. https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2857076

Erdelez et al. (2015) shared that ... ...( Erdelez et al.,  2015).

• << Previous: ChatGPT
• Next: Dissertations and Theses >>
• Last Updated: May 2, 2024 11:58 AM
• URL: https://library.csp.edu/apa

• Find Resources

Library and Academic Support Services Concordia University, St. Paul 1282 Concordia Aveneu Saint Paul, MN 55104

• 651-641-823
• [email protected]
• Report a problem

Connect with us

© Concordia University, St. Paul

2024 INTERNATIONAL PITTSBURGH COAL CONFERENCE

The fortieth annual pittsburgh coal conference, october 7 – 9, 2024.

The Conference was founded in the early 1970s to address global shortages of energy. This year, we are switching gears to focus on the benefits of using clean energy and carbon management technologies to minimize the effects of climate change. Our faithful conference attendees, who have been successful in developing and using a fossil fuel-based economy over the years, are now focusing on mitigating the global temperature rise impacted by mankind’s reliance upon fossil fuels and the resultant greenhouse gas emissions. For example, the Conference is dealing with both the energy and non-energy uses of fossil fuels in conjunction with carbon management to meet the ambitious Net Zero emissions scenario by the year 2050. In this pathway, in addition to the main pillars of decarbonization, including energy efficiency & conservation, renewables, nuclear, low-emissions fuels, and carbon capture & storage technologies, there are cross-cutting enablers, such as innovation, international collaboration, and digitalization, which could accelerate progress by strengthening policy or providing more effective technological solutions.

(For more background information on the world’s energy system including energy supply & transportation, uses of energy, and managing demand & emissions, visit the International Energy Agency website https://www.iea.org/energy-system. )

Conference Theme: “Technology innovation and transition to cleaner energy” surrounding the continued utilization of primary energy resources coupled with carbon management to better enable and transition to the future clean energy market.

ABSTRACT SUBMISSION GUIDELINES 

Abstract Requirements:  An abstract template is available here:  Abstract Template . Abstracts of potential papers may be submitted in all program topics. The abstract must include sufficient content and information for adequate evaluation by the Program Committee. The International Pittsburgh Coal Conference Program Committee reserves the right to accept, place on a waiting list, or reject any paper. Each abstract should include the following in WORD format:

• PROGRAM TOPIC (Please see the list above for your appropriate program topic)
• ABSTRACT TITLE
• AUTHOR LISTING (Principal/Corresponding Author First)
• CONTACT INFORMATION FOR EACH AUTHOR (Please list each authors' valid mailing address, COUNTRY, telephone, fax, and e-mail addresses for each author)
• ABSTRACT TEXT

Deadline for Submission: September 1, 2024  

Abstract Submission:  Please submit an abstract by email to [email protected] . 

AUTHOR NOTIFICATION and AUTHOR DATA SHEET

The Program Committee will inform the submitting author of the paper's status. All presenting authors must submit an Author Data Sheet . 

Author Data Sheet Deadline: TBA

Author Data Sheet Submission : Please submit the Author Data Sheet by email to  [email protected] .

SUBMISSION OF MANUSCRIPTS

Deadline: TBA

Submission: Completed Manuscripts are to be submitted by E-MAIL (preferred) to: [email protected] in *Unsecured/Unprotected PDF Format (preferred) or Microsoft Word. Please notify the conference secretary if you have changed your Title or Authors since the original abstract submission! There is NO page limitation for the manuscripts.

Manuscript Format:

We have partnered with Curran Associates, Inc. to have the conference proceedings indexed in SCOPUS (the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature, scientific journals, books and conference proceedings) and have them available at various international scientific libraries. Manuscripts with clear sections containing the following items will be indexed in the conference proceedings on SCOPUS. Please take care to include these items in your manuscript.

• BODY OF MANUSCRIPT

****** If your manuscript contains multiple graphs, charts, or figures please submit your manuscript in PDF Format (must be UNSECURED/UNPROTECTED). The PCC will NOT be responsible for errors resulting from conversion to PDF.

Presentation Slides: A PDF of your slide presentation or poster presentation will be accepted as your "manuscript" should a written manuscript be difficult to produce. You may also submit both a written manuscript and a PDF of your presentation and both will be included in the proceedings. **NOTE: Presentation slides submitted as a manuscript will not be indexed in SCOPUS.

Requirements for Publishing in Conference Proceedings:

As is common practice for professional conferences, authors are required to register and pay the appropriate registration fees for the conference. Manuscripts and presentation materials will only be included if the author has met ALL of these requirements.

• Completed registration form
• Paid conference registration

Guidelines for Oral and Poster Presentations:

• Please refer to the link for the Presenter Instructions .
• Please note all manuscripts and presentations must be in English. 

Questions & Contact

Nicole Drebsky ,  Conference Coordinator

International Pittsburgh Coal Conference

University of Pittsburgh 

3700 O'Hara Street 940 Benedum Hall Pittsburgh, PA 15261 USA

Phone: + 1-412-624-7440 (We are currently working remotely. Please leave a voice message and we will return your call.) Email:  [email protected]

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Conference Presentations

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

This resource provides a detailed overview of the common types of conference papers and sessions graduate students can expect, followed by pointers on presenting conference papers for an audience. 

Types of conference papers and sessions

Panel presentations are the most common form of presentation you will encounter in your graduate career. You will be one of three to four participants in a panel or session (the terminology varies depending on the organizers) and be given fifteen to twenty minutes to present your paper. This is often followed by a ten-minute question-and-answer session either immediately after your presentation or after all of the speakers are finished. It is up to the panel organizer to decide upon this framework. In the course of the question-and-answer session, you may also address and query the other panelists if you have questions yourself. Note that you can often propose a conference presentation by yourself and be sorted onto a panel by conference organizers, or you can propose a panel with a group of colleagues. Self-proposed panels typically have more closely related topics than conference-organized panels.

Roundtables feature an average of five to six speakers, each of whom gets the floor for approximately five to ten minutes to speak on their respective topics and/or subtopics. At times, papers from the speakers might be circulated in advance among the roundtable members or even prospective attendees.

Workshops feature one or a few organizers, who usually give a brief presentation but spend the majority of the time for the session facilitating an activity that attendees will do. Some common topics for these sessions typically include learning a technology or generating some content, such as teaching materials.

Lightning talks (or Ignite talks, or Pecha Kucha talks) are very short presentations where presenters' slide decks automatically advance after a few seconds; most individual talks are no longer than 5 minutes, and a lightning talk session typically invites 10 or more presenters to participate over the course of an hour or two rather than limiting the presenters like a panel presentation. A lightning talk session will sometimes be held as a sort of competition where attendees can vote for the best talk. 

SIGs (Special Interest Groups) are groups of scholars focused on a particular smaller topic within the purview of the larger conference. The structure of these sessions varies by conference and even by group, but in general they tend to be structured either more like a panel presentation, with presenters and leaders, or more like a roundtable, with several speakers and a particular meeting agenda. These styles resemble, respectively, a miniconference focusing on a particular topic and a committee meeting. 

Papers with respondents are structured around a speaker who gives an approximately thirty-minute paper and a respondent who contributes their own thoughts, objections, and further questions in the following fifteen minutes. Finally, the speaker gets that same amount of time to formulate their reply to the respondent.

Poster presentations ask participants to visually display their ideas on a research poster, which is typically displayed with other research posters in a specific area at a conference. The poster needs to be understandable on its own (without the author) as viewers sometimes look through the posters outside the bounds of the poster session, which is a scheduled period of time where poster authors stand with their posters and engage viewers in conversation about the work. Research posters have long tended to follow common templates for design, but in recent years some scholars have begun challenging these templates for improved usability (for example, the Better Poster campaign as described here  or the APA template based on the original, here.

You can read more about research posters on our resource here .

Presenting the conference paper

Aim to take less time than you are given! If your presentation slot is 15 minutes, aim for 13 or 14 when you practice. A little leeway and a slightly shorter presentation is a courtesy to your audience and to your fellow presenters, and will not at all imply that you are unprepared or unprofessional — in fact, being able to keep well within your allotted time is the mark of a good presenter.

Make sure you speak slowly and clearly, using accessibility aids if available such as a microphone or closed captioning on a slide deck. Many presenters have begun bringing accessibility copies of their talks, which are printed transcripts of the talk using a larger font for audience members who need them. It is also becoming increasingly common for presenters at conferences to share their slides and copies of their talk via a shortened link or QR code found on the bottom of the slides so that audiences may access them later or even while they are in your session.

The conventions for presentation differ based on field. Some fields tend toward reading papers aloud with very little audiovisual accompaniment; others use slide decks; others speak extemporaneously. You can find out more about typical practices in your field by attending conferences yourself and by asking mentors. Generally, you will be able to improve the accessibility of your presentation if you have a visual accompaniment and prepared remarks.

Even in fields where presenters tend to read papers verbatim, it is rarely a good idea to bring a paper from a class or another research paper you have written without editing it for an oral presentation. Seminar papers tend to be too long to read in 15 minutes, and often lead to graduate students surpassing their time limits. Moreover, research papers are meant to be read — they lack the kinds of repetition and simple sentence structure that are more beneficial to listeners. Finally, conference presentations do not serve the same purposes as most class papers — typically in a class, you're expected to show that you have understood the material, but at a conference, listeners are more interested in hearing what contributions you have that might help them in their own research. It's typical to move the bulk of your literature review to an appendix or another document so that you can discuss other scholarship in the area if it comes up in the Q&A, but during your presentation you're left free to focus on your own methods and findings. (Many presenters will even say: "I'm skipping a lot of [X material] for the sake of time, but I'm happy to discuss it later with anyone who's interested.")

Since you will present your paper orally, you may repeat important points and say more about the structure of the essay than a written submission to a journal (or a paper for your undergraduate or graduate courses) would require. This often means signposting orally when you are moving to a new section of the paper or when you are shifting to a new idea. The thesis of your paper should come early in your presentation to give listeners a clear understanding of what is to follow. At this point, you may also overview or forecast your paper and tell listeners how you will move from one argument to the next. It is generally advised to quickly summarize your important points in a bulleted list at the end of your presentation to remind everyone of the two or three most essential arguments or findings.

If you use a slide presentation, you may want to follow the guidelines presented in the OWL resource, Designing an Effective PowerPoint Presentation .

• Executive Subcommittee
• PCIC Eugene J. Fagan Fund
• IEEE Prize Paper Awards
• Past Chairs
• PCIC Awards
• Additional Links
• Member Resources

Author Resources

• Myron Zucker Travel Grant
• Tutorial Proposal Form
• Abstract Submission Form
• PDH Request Form
• Conferences By Year
• Annual Contributions
• IAS Conferences
• Operating Subcommittees
• Technical Subcommittees

IEEE IAS PCIC

We’d be delighted to have you as an author at our annual technical conference. Please review the following resources as you work towards your paper submittal and contact Paul Sullivan ( [email protected] ) if you have any questions.

Click Here Timeline and Instructions for Conference Papers

Paper guide.

The  PCIC Technical Paper Style Guide provides detailed information for developing and formatting PCIC papers. This document provides information on how to develop a paper and is formatted in the style described in the Guide. Authors are encouraged to use the Word version of the Guide as the starting point for their paper.

Microsoft Word – Paper Style Guide

Presentation Guide

A PCIC Microsoft PowerPoint template and presentation tips are available here:

PCIC-2023-Presentation-Template-R2

Refer to the PCIC Presentation Tips document for suggestions on how to make an effective presentation for the conference: PCIC Presentation Tips

Use of the template is optional, but it may help simplify the presentation process for PCIC paper presenters.

Final Paper

Once a final paper is approved by your Technical Subcommittee Chair, the author will receive an invitation from ScholarOne Manuscripts for that author to complete the copyright transfer for the paper and will provide instructions on how to submit the paper

PCIC Policy on Freedom from Commercialism.

In order to uphold the integrity of the annual PCIC Technical Conference and to maintain the high standards of PCIC technical papers, authors should become familiar with the  Policy on Technical Paper Commercialism .

Two copyrights are required for each PCIC paper. One copyright is for the PCIC Conference Record and will be submitted through the IEEE electronic copyright systems (eCF). The second copyright is for the paper in the ScholarOne system. That copyright is for the version of the paper if it is selected to be published in the Industry Applications Magazine or Transactions on Industry Applications . A copy of the April 2016 version of the IEEE copyright form can in the ScholarOne system be accessed by  clicking here .

The use of IEEE copyrighted material is governed by the IEEE Policies document that can be found on  this website . Section 6.3.1.7 and 6.3.1.8 of the November 2017 version of the IEEE Policies document states the following.

• 1.7 – Prior to publication by the IEEE, all authors or their employers shall transfer to the IEEE in writing any copyright they hold for their individual papers. Such transfer shall be a necessary requirement for publication, except for material in the public domain or which is reprinted with permission from a copyrighted publication.
• 1.8 – In return for the transfer of authors’ rights, the IEEE shall grant authors and their employers’ permission to make copies and otherwise reuse the material under terms approved by the Board of Directors which shall be specified in the PSPB Operations Manual.

The Publication Services and Products Board (PSPB) Operations Manual is available on the same website listed for the IEEE policies document. Section 8.1.9 in the January 2017 version of the PSPB Operations Manual describes how the document ban be disseminated. Section 8.1.9 subsections A5, B, C, D, and E are shown below.

• A5 – IEEE does not restrict the rights of authors to use their IEEE copyrighted articles in their own teaching, training, or work responsibilities, or those of their institutions or employers. In any preprint version archived by the author after submission, IEEE requires that IEEE will be credited as copyright holder. Upon publication of the work, authors are asked to include the article’s Digital Object Identifier (DOI).
• B – In any electronic posting permitted by this Section 8.1.9, the following copyright notice must be displayed on the initial screen displaying IEEE-copyrighted material: “© 20xx IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works.”
• C – Authors and/or their employers shall have the right to post the accepted version of IEEE-copyrighted articles on their own personal servers or the servers of their institutions or employers without permission from IEEE, provided that the posted version includes a prominently displayed IEEE copyright notice (as shown in 8.1.9.B, above) and, when published, a full citation to the original IEEE publication, including a Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Authors shall not post the final, published versions of their articles.
• D – Before submitting an article to an IEEE publication, authors frequently post preprints of their articles to their own web site, their employer’s site, or to another server that invites constructive comment from colleagues and provides a publication time stamp. Upon submission of an article to IEEE, an author is required to transfer copyright in the article to IEEE, and the author must update any previously posted version of the article with a prominently displayed IEEE copyright notice (as shown in 8.1.9.B). Upon publication of an article by the IEEE, the author must replace any previously posted electronic versions of the article with either (1) the full citation to the IEEE work with a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), or (2) the accepted version only with the DOI (not the IEEE-published version). IEEE shall make available to each author the preprint version of the article that the author can post and that includes the Digital Object Identifier (DOI), IEEE’s copyright notice, and a notice indicating the article has been accepted for publication by IEEE.
• E – An author is expressly permitted to post any portion of the accepted version of his/her own IEEE-copyrighted articles on the author’s personal web site or the servers of the author’s institution or company in connection with the author’s teaching, training, or work responsibilities, provided that the appropriate copyright, credit, and reuse notice from 8.1.9.B (above) appears prominently with the posted material. Examples of permitted uses are lecture materials, course packs, e-reserves, conference presentations, or in-house training courses.

Refer to the most recent versions of the IEEE Policies document and the IEEE PSPB Operations Manual for the latest and additional information concerning IEEE copyright requirements.

Additional Aids for Authors and Reviewers

IEEE Copyright Information IAS ScholarOne Manuscript Workflow Style for IAS Conference and Transactions Papers (Note: use link above for PCIC papers) Preparation of Papers in Two-Column Format for the Conference Record of IAS Annual Meeting (Note: use link above for PCIC papers) Recommended Unit Symbols, SI Prefixes and Abbreviations

• Research Guides
• A-Z Database List
• Library Home

APA 7th Edition Citation Guide

• Formatting Essays
• Paraphrase and Summary
• Bibliographic Citations
• Sources with Multiple Authors
• Sources with No Author, Date, Title or Page Numbers
• Journal Articles
• Magazine and Newspaper Articles
• Reference Articles, Encyclopedia and Dictionary Entries
• Books and eBooks
• Conference Proceedings and Presentations

Article Published in a Conference Proceeding

Conference presentations.

• Dissertations and Theses
• Films, Video and Audio
• Government Documents, Non-Profit and Corporate Reports
• Images and Advertisements
• Personal Communications (E-mails, Interviews, and etc.)
• Religious Texts
• Social Media
• Statutes, Legal Documents and the Constitution
• Avoiding Plagiarism

Sara Carman , Librarian

Call: 320-629-5169

Laurie Jorgensen , Library Technologist

Call: 320-629-5145

24/7 Chat help is available!

Note:  To cite an article from a conference proceeding, use the same format as a chapter in an edited book or a journal, depending on where the article was published.

Note : Specify the type of presentation in brackets after the title.  For example: [Conference session], [Paper presentation], or [Poster presentation]

• << Previous: Books and eBooks
• Next: Dissertations and Theses >>
• Last Updated: Feb 20, 2024 5:50 PM
• URL: https://pine.libguides.com/APA7Guide

Customer Service 1 (800) 466-3337

• Timeline & History
• Sponsorship & Paid Media
• Economic Impact
• Values Wheel
• News Releases
• Give Me An H Podcast

Investor Relations

• Stock Quote & Chart
• Historical Lookup
• Investment Calculator
• Stock Splits
• Dividend History
• Analyst Coverage
• Quarterly Earnings
• Current Forms
• Annual Reports
• SEC Filings
• Events & Presentations
• Board of Directors
• Committee Members & Charters
• Shareholder Services
• Direct Stock Purchase Plan
• Stock Transfer Agent
• Account Access
• Employee Stock Plan Contact
• Electronic Delivery of Proxy Materials
• Annual Meeting
• Contact Investor Relations
• 2023 Investor and Analyst Conference
• Investor Documents
• Request Printed Materials
• Email Alerts
• ESG Investors
• Serving Veterans
• Disaster Relief
• Path to Pro
• Responsibility
• 2023 ESG Report
• Resources & Reports
• Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
• Supplier Diversity
• Political Engagement
• Shop Online
• Store Finder
• Stock Information
• Financial Reports
• Corporate Governance
• Investor Resources

The Home Depot to Host First Quarter Earnings Conference Call on May 14

Apr 30, 2024

ATLANTA , April 30, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- The Home Depot, the world's largest home improvement retailer, announced today that it will hold its First Quarter Earnings Conference Call on Tuesday, May 14, at 9 a.m. ET.

A webcast will be available by logging onto http://ir.homedepot.com/events-and-presentations  and selecting the First Quarter Earnings Conference Call icon. The webcast will be archived, and the replay will be available beginning at approximately noon on May 14.

The Home Depot is the world's largest home improvement specialty retailer. At the end of fiscal year 2023, the company operated a total of 2,335 retail stores in all 50 states, the District of Columbia , Puerto Rico , the U.S. Virgin Islands , Guam , 10 Canadian provinces and Mexico . The company employs approximately 465,000 associates. The Home Depot's stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: HD) and is included in the Dow Jones industrial average and Standard & Poor's 500 index.

SOURCE The Home Depot

• E-mail Alerts

You may automatically receive The Home Depot, Inc. financial information by e-mail. To choose your options for e-mail notification, please enter your e-mail address below and click Submit.

Email: [email protected] IR Coordinator: 770-384-2871

For all other inquiries including Customer Care issues please call The Home Depot Store Support Center at 1-770-433-8211 , or toll free 1-800-654-0688 .

Quick Links

• Buy Stock Direct
• Privacy & Security Statement

UK Tax Strategy

About The Home Depot

©2024 Home Depot Product Authority, LLC All Rights Reserved. Use of this site is subject to certain Terms of Use.

• Study and research support
• Referencing
• Leeds Harvard referencing examples

Conference presentation

Leeds harvard: conference presentation, reference examples.

Family name, INITIAL(S) (of the presenter). Year. Title of the presentation . Title of conference, date of conference, location of conference.

Newton, A.J. and Pullinger, D.J. 2012. Acting on PhD student feedback to create new learning resources. Librarians' Information Literacy Annual Conference, 11 April, Glasgow.

Slides from a conference presentation

Family name, INITIAL(S) (of the presenter). Year. Title of the presentation [PowerPoint presentation]. Title of conference, date of conference, location of conference.

Newton, A.J. and Pullinger, D.J. 2012. Acting on PhD student feedback to create new learning resources [PowerPoint presentation] . Librarians' Information Literacy Annual Conference, 11 April, Glasgow.

Citation examples

Author and date.

When the author name is not mentioned in the text, the citation consists of the author’s name and the year of publication in brackets.

It was emphasised that citations in the text should be consistent (Jones, 2017).

If you have already named the author in the text, only the publication year needs to be mentioned in brackets.

Jones (2017) emphasised that citations in the text should be consistent.

Three or more authors

If a source has three or more authors, the name of the first author should be given, followed by the phrase "et al."

It was emphasised that citations in a text should be consistent (Jones et al., 2017).

Jones et al. (2017) emphasised that citations in a text should be consistent.

Leeds Harvard does not use ibid to refer to previously cited items. If you are citing the same item twice in a row (i.e. you do not cite any other items in the text between the two citations) you must write the full citation again. As usual, if you are directly quoting or paraphrasing specific ideas, you should include a page number (if there is one). 

Jones et al. (2017, p.24) emphasised that citations in a text should be consistent and argued that referencing is a key part of academic integrity (2017, p.27). Furthermore, having a broad range of references in a text is an indicator of the breadth of a scholar's reading and research (Jones et al., 2017, p.14).

Common issues

When you're referencing with Leeds Harvard you may come across issues with missing details, multiple authors, edited books, references to another author's work or online items, to name a few. Here are some tips on how to deal with some common issues when using Leeds Harvard.

Skip straight to the issue that affects you:

• Online items
• URL web addresses
• Multiple authors
• Corporate author(s) or organisation(s)
• Multiple publisher details
• Editions and reprints
• Missing details
• Multiple sources with different authors
• Sources written by the same author in the same year
• Sources with the same author in different years
• Two authors with the same surname in the same year
• The work of one author referred to by another
• Anonymising sources for confidentiality
• Identifying the authors’ family name (surname)

• JD Application
• LLM, MLS, JSD Programs
• Online Degree Programs

Welcome to WashULaw

The perfect location to start your legal education with access to legal minds across the nation and the world.

Which Program is Right for You?

Compare the options that best fit your needs.

Faculty Presentations at AALS Clinical Legal Conference

The Association of American Law Schools (AALS) is hosting the 2024 Conference on Clinical Legal Education in St. Louis this week. WashULaw faculty are hosting sessions on a variety of clinical education topics at the conference.

Peter W. Goode Session: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics: Teaching Students to Read, Recognize, Understand, and Present Data in Client Representations

Lisa Hoppenjans Session: Combating Interference in Clinical Programs Session: The Privacy Paradox: Balancing Transparency and Privacy in the Quest for Justice

Elizabeth J. Hubertz Session: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics: Teaching Students to Read, Recognize, Understand, and Present Data in Client Representations

Peter Joy Session: Combating Interference in Clinical Programs

Robert R. Kuehn Session: Combating Interference in Clinical Programs

Jonathan Smith Session: AAPI Clinicians Workshop: Unfinished Stories about Asian American Identity

The full, searchable list of conference speakers is available here .

On Friday, May 3, Professor Karen Tokarz will receive the William Pincus Award, given based on scholarship, program design and implementation, or other activity beneficial to clinical education or the advancement of justice.

Additionally, Dean Osgood and Associate Dean for Clinical Education Sarah Narkiewicz are hosting a reception for attendees of the conference in Crowder Courtyard at Anheuser-Bush Hall. We look forward to welcoming guests for an evening of networking!

Related News

Clinical education program honors 50th anniversary award recipients, interdisciplinary environmental clinic faculty are confluence award finalists, supply drive success, low income taxpayer clinic is beneficiary of cy pres award.

For immediate release | April 25, 2024

Academy Award-nominated actor, mental health advocate, and author Taraji P. Henson to present at ALA 2024 Annual Conference & Exhibition in San Diego

CHICAGO — Today, the American Library Association (ALA) announced that Academy Award-nominated actor, producer, author, and mental health advocate Taraji P. Henson will present at the ALA 2024 Annual Conference & Exhibition . The conference will be held at the San Diego Convention Center and surrounding hotels in San Diego, California, June 27-July 2, 2024.

Henson joins ALA Annual to discuss her new book, “You Can Be a Good Friend (No Matter What!).” The debut picture book, illustrated by Paul Kellam, and available June 24, 2024, promotes mental wellness, learning socialization skills, embracing the importance of standing in your own uniqueness, and promoting friendship over bullying. It’s the perfect read for easing back-to-school jitters for the new school year, helping children (ages 4-8) overcome anxieties, and classroom/library story time and bedtime reading.

In 2018, Henson, and her best friend, Tracie Jade Jenkins, co-founded the Boris Lawrence Henson Foundation (BLHF) honoring the legacy of Henson’s father, Boris Lawrence Henson, who battled untreated mental health issues after returning from the Vietnam War. Motivated by their own experiences and the glaring absence of culturally relevant mental health support, they took a bold step forward and established BLHF with a clear mission: to destigmatize mental health within the Black community and enhance accessibility. The foundation promotes mental health awareness and provides resources and services aimed at tackling the mental health crisis.

ALA Annual Registration is open.

The 2024 ALA Annual Conference & Exhibition invites library professionals from around the world to engage in a variety of professional development opportunities, including the ALA President’s Program with ALA President Emily Drabinski; ALA division, chair, and round table sessions that will focus on the important topics and challenges that libraries face today; ALA leadership programs, ALA Governance sessions, and more. The event will host 175+ education programs, 700+ speakers/authors, and 470+ exhibitors.

The Library Marketplace will feature exhibitors showcasing innovative products, services, and titles; publishers that will host established and new authors on nine live stages; “Meet the Authors” and the “Autographing Area” allowing opportunities for attendees to chat with authors and have books signed; e-zine and maker spaces for creative projects; the Podcast Recording Booth, where authors will record podcasts, free advanced reading copies of books, The Beach @ ALA, and additional fun activities.

The ALA JobLIST Placement and Career Development Center will offer career coaching, Mentoring on the Fly, an Open House and Job Fair, photography services, resume reviews, and career guidance workshops.

San Diego is the 2024 ALA Annual host city and offers beautiful outdoor landscapes and weather, museums, restaurants, the San Diego Central Library, and other fun places to visit.

ALA Registrants are now able to build their personalized schedules in the Conference Scheduler . More sessions and activities will be added soon.

Get updates from the 2024 Annual Conference & Exhibition and follow # ALAAC24 and social media at ALA Twitter /X, ALA Conferences Twitter /X, ALA Facebook , and Instagram .

Media interested in registering for the session may contact the ALA Communications and Marketing Office at [email protected] .

About the American Library Association The American Library Association (ALA) is the foremost national organization providing resources to inspire library and information professionals to transform their communities through essential programs and services. For more than 140 years, the ALA has been the trusted voice for academic, public, school, government and special libraries, advocating for the profession and the library’s role in enhancing learning and ensuring access to information for all. For more information, visit ala.org .

Donna Hunter

Conference Marketing Specialist

American Library Association

Conference Services

Share This Page

Featured News

April 17, 2024

The TRANSFORMERS Are Ready to Roll Out for Library Card Sign-Up Month

The American Library Association (ALA) is teaming up with multiplatform entertainment company Skybound Entertainment and leading toy and game company Hasbro to encourage people to roll out to their libraries with the TRANSFORMERS franchise, featuring Optimus Prime, as part of Library Card Sign-Up Month in September.

April 15, 2024

ALA launches FY 2025 #FundLibraries campaign, urges Congress to fully fund key federal programs

ALA launches FY 2025 #FundLibraries campaign, urges Congress to fully fund key federal programs.

press release

April 10, 2024

American Library Association Launches Reader. Voter. Ready. Campaign to Equip Libraries for 2024 Elections

Today the American Library Association (ALA) kicks off its Reader. Voter. Ready. campaign, calling on advocates to sign a pledge to be registered, informed, and ready to vote in all local, state and federal elections in 2024.

April 8, 2024

ALA kicks off National Library Week revealing the annual list of Top 10 Most Challenged Books and the State of America’s Libraries Report

The American Library Association (ALA) launched National Library Week with today’s release of its highly anticipated annual list of the Top 10 Most Challenged Books of 2023 and the State of America’s Libraries Report, which highlights the ways libraries...

Pun wins 2025-2026 ALA presidency

Raymond Pun, Academic and Research Librarian at the Alder Graduate School of Education in California has been elected 2024-2025 president-elect of the American Library Association (ALA).