Scoring posters at scientific meetings: first impressions count

Smith, Philip E. M. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4250-2562, Fuller, G. and Dunstan, Frank David John ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1043-5281 2004. Scoring posters at scientific meetings: first impressions count. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 97 (7) , pp. 340-341. 10.1177/014107680409700714

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Many specialist societies present ‘best poster’ prizes, yet without generally agreed assessment methods. 31 posters at a neurology meeting were divided randomly into two sets; 14 neurologists, randomized into two groups, were each assigned one poster set. They ‘quick scored’ the first half, viewing posters for 10-15 seconds, and ‘detailed scored’ the others. 11 administrators and pharmaceutical representatives quick scored all posters. Neurologists' quick score ranking correlated highly (r=0.75) with other neurologists' detailed score ranking, and identified four of their six top-ranked posters. Correlations were strongest for presentation (r=0.65), message (r=0.65) and star-quality (r=0.64), but weak for facts (r=0.09), originality (r=0.15) or science (r=0.02). Non-neurologists could not identify the posters ranked highest by neurologists. We conclude that quick ranking by specialists can efficiently identify the best posters for more detailed assessment. On this basis we offer poster-scoring guidelines for use at scientific meetings.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Medicine Neuroscience and Mental Health Research Institute (NMHRI)
Subjects:	R Medicine > R Medicine (General)
Publisher:	Royal Society of Medicine Press
ISSN:	0141-0768
Last Modified:	27 Oct 2022 08:53
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/63653

Citation Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item