Related Experiment Videos
Scoring posters at scientific meetings: first impressions count
Philip E M Smith1, Geraint Fuller, Frank Dunstan
1Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Wales, College of Medicine, Cardiff CF14 4XW, Wales, UK. SmithPE@cardiff.ac.uk
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
|July 2, 2004
Summary
Specialist societies can efficiently identify top-ranked scientific posters using quick scoring methods. This approach, tested at a neurology meeting, helps pinpoint the best posters for detailed evaluation.
Area of Science:
- Neurology
- Medical Education
- Scientific Communication
Background:
- Specialist societies frequently award "best poster" prizes.
- There is a lack of standardized assessment methods for these awards.
- Evaluating scientific posters is crucial for recognizing excellence in research dissemination.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess the effectiveness of a rapid assessment method for identifying top-ranked scientific posters.
- To determine if quick scoring by specialists correlates with detailed scoring.
- To develop guidelines for poster assessment at scientific meetings.
Main Methods:
- 31 neurology posters were randomly assigned to two sets.
- 14 neurologists performed both "quick scoring" (10-15 seconds) and "detailed scoring" on different poster sets.
- Administrators and pharmaceutical representatives also performed quick scoring.
Main Results:
- Neurologists' quick score rankings highly correlated (r=0.75) with detailed score rankings.
- Quick scoring identified 4 of the top 6 posters.
- Correlations were strongest for presentation, message, and star-quality, but weak for facts, originality, or science.
Conclusions:
- Quick scoring by specialists is an efficient method for identifying top scientific posters.
- This method can be used as a preliminary step for more detailed assessment.
- Guidelines for poster scoring at scientific meetings are proposed based on these findings.