Abstract Submission Calls

[Admin]

We are working with a contractor (Jackeline Brakey, who did this for the 2014 Seattle  meeting and does this for Society for Epidemiologic Research) to run our abstract collection and management system (see the General Plan). Here is the list of abstract items that were collected along with abstract submissions in previous conference (Modifications have been suggested from SNRN)

Abstract Form

*Title
*Abstract
*Category for review (*primary, used for review, plus two more that are optional)
*Presentation preference (podium, poster, no preference)
Consider abstract for student award (y/n) **this is from 2012**
Consider abstract for new researcher award (y/n) **this is from 2012**
Authors
*Name
Contact details (*org, address, city, state, zip, country)
*Email
Student status
*Presenter (Y/N)

The list of topics which authors were permitted to choose from to characterize their paper are the followings. Please comment on these.

Listed below are the topic areas for submitted abstracts and for choosing reviewers.

Advances Statistical and Epidemiological Methods
Aging and environment
Ambient Air Pollution and Cardio metabolic Disorders
Ambient Air Pollution and Respiratory Disorders (children)
Ambient Air Pollution and Respiratory Disorders (adults)
Ambient Air Pollution and Reproductive Outcomes
Ambient Air Pollution and Neurological and Neurobehavioral changes (children)
Ambient Air Pollution and Neurological and Neurobehavioral changes (adults)
Arsenic exposure and health
Biomarkers
Biomass Burning
Built Environment/ Physical Activity/ Green Spaces
Cancer and environment
Causal inference in environmental epidemiology
Chemicals, metals and health
Children's Environment and Health
Climate Change and Health
Health impact assessment
Indoor Environment and Health
Endocrine Disruptors
Environmental disasters
Environmental Equity and Socioeconomic Differences
Epigenetics, Genetics and Gene-Environment Interactions
Ethics, Advocacy, and Public Policy
Exposure Assessment Air Pollution
Exposure Assessment Others
Exposome
Food and Nutrition
Methods in environmental epidemiology
Microbiome, infections and environment
Noise and other physical factors
Occupational Exposures and Health
Organic chemicals, Pesticides, Persistent Organic Pollutants
Perinatal exposures and reproductive health
Policy and Public Health
Radiation and Electro-magnetic Fields
Risk assessment and communication
Temperature and Health
Soil Contamination and Health
Spatial epidemiology and GIS
Water quality, disinfection by-products  and Health
Wastes and Health
Women's health and environment

In the past, Kate Adams from HEI volunteered to be the Abstracts Chair for the meeting. This time we have Danielle Vienneau from Basel. Excellent, thanks!

In the past we had discussions on two aspects 1. The review should be blind, however do we allow to tell the place, city, where the study was done? 2. Although we do not encourage tables and figures, should we tolerate a table or a figure that the authors do not consider as  "preliminary"?

Please, post comments on this part.

[Marco Martuzzi]

Some possible adjustements on the list of topics for abstracts triaging, for consideration:
- Split Risk assessment and communication into two separate entries
- Merge "Advanced tats and epi methods", and "Methods in env epi" (ie remove one)
- Add the entry: (i) Nanomaterials/nanoparticles
- Modify entry: "Health Impact Assessment and participatory epidemiology"

Point 1: I agree to anonymised abstracts with place of origin.

Regarding tables and figures, I'd say yes to tables up to 4 rows x 5 columns + headers, which must be counted as maybe 100 words. No to figures. Too complicated?
Marco

[Elaine Fuertes]

Just a quick comment on the information collected under "Authors". It would be good to collect information on student status and new researcher status (< 5 years since terminal degree) using two separate check boxes, only one of which can be selected. This information can of course also be collected at time of registration.

[livepibj]

The list is extensive enough and I am sure we could be flexible in combining topics or splitting topics once we receive and review the abstracts.

I don't mind whether the review should be blind or not. Most of us would have had plenty of experience in reviewing manuscripts and grant proposals,  and I am sure would review the abstracts objectively.

Re tables and graphs - I am happy with both, but I think the graphs will need to be of high resolution.

[jcwikel]

I would suggest adding the category of "Social Activism in Environmental Health".
I think figures are not be suitable for abstracts and I would not encourage tables either.

I wanted to suggest inviting Jodie Williams who received the Noble Peace Prize for the work she did in clearing the environment of LANDMINES to be an engaging and attractive PLENARY SPEAKER, especially in the area of SOCIAL ACTIVISM.

I think the review should be blind but stating city and country where the research took place should be required.

[Martin Tondel]

I agree to anonymised abstracts and say no to tables and figures in the abstracts.

[Ana Maria Mora]

Although there is an overlap between some of the topics, I think that we can combine (or split) them after we receive the abstracts.
I don't think that we should anonymize the study area because it might be a relevant piece of information when we are putting together the oral sessions.
I would not encourage tables or figures.

[TonyFletcher]

Recalling the experience of reviewing abstracts for the last meeting, I thought the initial scoring being done anonymised was fine, but in assembling abstracts into coherent sessions as session chairs it would have been more convenient if at that stage they were no longer anonymised.

[Sponsored content]