Symposium update

The Programme Committee have now finalised the list of platform presentations for the 21st International Symposium on ALS/MND.

We are now in the process of informing the presenters of the decision of the abstracts they submitted to us for consideration… so far that means telling the authors of 382 abstracts of the decision that we have reached. Luckily we don’t email them all individually! Some will be delighted as they have been accepted for a platform slot where they have their ‘15 minutes of fame’ to talk about their research to a crowd of around 450 of their peers. We’ve already had  46 presenters confirm their slots and only 32 to go (discluding plenaries)!

For those less inclined to present their work at the platform, or those that we simply could not fit into the jam packed programme, we may offer them a poster presentation for their work. Posters are designated a space of 1m by 1m in size to present their work on a face-to-face level (rather than a face-to-crowd level).

There are also a handful of abstracts that will be rejected for the symposium. If the abstract describes research that has not been properly conducted, is misleading or does not fulfil the terms and conditions for acceptance of an abstract then it might be rejected. It’s a nasty job, but it has to be done.

Our work doesn’t end there for the symposium. Even though in a few weeks time we’ll know who will be presenting their work and as what, we then have the daunting, challenging yet somewhat rewarding task of proof reading ALL of the abstracts…

2 thoughts on “Symposium update

  1. Kelly, do you still ask for external help in proof-reading the abstract book? I did it once when I was an MNDA-funded PhD student and it was a great experience. It gave me a preview of the reviewing process, a sneak-peek at what was coming up in the conference, and the opportunity to pay back in some small way the Association for supporting me. The Association could ask its current funded PhD students to do this as part of their scientific training, what do you think?

    • Hi Paul, I’m afraid we don’t still ask our PhD students for help in proof reading. A few years ago the research development team consisted of only three people and I know that Brian and Belinda were extremely grateful for our students help in ploughing through the abstracts. However, the team is now somewhat better resourced and we have the capacity to read all of the abstracts in-house. This does save a few administrative headaches!

      We are however thinking of engaging with our PhD students and grantees in other ways – such as offering them an opportunity to become a guest blogger on this site. This would not only be an opportunity to tell the world what they’re up to in the lab but also a good way of learning how to honing their scientific communication skills! (Talk about spoilers!)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s