Journal of Current Research in Scientific Medicine

LETTER TO EDITOR
Year
: 2018  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 128--129

Reply to “Letter to editor” written in response to “Perspectives on poster as a presentation mode in conferences”


Himel Mondal1, Shaikat Mondal2,  
1 Department of Physiology, MKCG Medical College, Ganjam, Odisha, India
2 Department of Physiology, Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Correspondence Address:
Himel Mondal
Department of Physiology, MKCG Medical College, Ganjam - 760 004, Odisha
India




How to cite this article:
Mondal H, Mondal S. Reply to “Letter to editor” written in response to “Perspectives on poster as a presentation mode in conferences”.J Curr Res Sci Med 2018;4:128-129


How to cite this URL:
Mondal H, Mondal S. Reply to “Letter to editor” written in response to “Perspectives on poster as a presentation mode in conferences”. J Curr Res Sci Med [serial online] 2018 [cited 2021 Apr 18 ];4:128-129
Available from: https://www.jcrsmed.org/text.asp?2018/4/2/128/247488


Full Text



Dear Sir,

We thank the author for her/his interest on the published article “Perspectives on poster as a presentation mode in conferences.”[1] The author pointed out some important aspects of poster presentation and provided suggestions for the conduct of a successful conference with poster as a presentation mode.

We agree with the author that there may be some difficulty from the part of organizers in ascertaining the validity and credibility of posters from “unstructured” abstract. However, many organizers now accept “structured” abstract at par with that of oral presentation. Hence, it may be possible to assess the credibility of the abstract as it is done for oral presentation.

Author opined that it may be difficult assessing the presenter regarding the scientific content in the poster. However, this difficulty may be faced with both oral and poster presentation.

Tandem session of poster presentation is really a problem for effective knowledge transfer. Hence, poster session may be conducted simultaneously with oral presentation in different halls considering its equal scientific content as oral presentation.

During evaluation of poster, the assessors may experience “visualization fatigue” as described by the author. In oral presentation, the audience may show fluctuation in attention.[2] Uniform evaluation capabilities of the assessor may also fluctuate more toward the end of the session. Hence, subjective evaluation method has limitation both for oral and poster presentation. These can be partially overcome by the use of objective evaluation methods by multiple assessors. Then, the average of scores may be taken for better acceptability of the evaluation.

The author pointed out a fact that many organizers do not store the poster in any repository. However, if this hinders the knowledge dissemination, authors themselves can contribute for storage of their poster in open access repository as described in the guidelines below.

Supporting the suggestions provided by the author, we would like to share some additional views. First, scrutiny of the abstract of the poster should be done with peer review and the review should be aimed to improve the scientific content of the article, not primarily aimed to reject the article.[3] Second, as the abstract has been peer reviewed; the flawed abstract is already filtered, so presenters may dress up their posters with visually appealing styles. Third, considering the popularity of electronic media, organizers may reinforce audiovisual component of the presentation along with suggested printed media by the author. Finally, many organizers may not be capable of maintaining a retrievable digital archive of the posters and content of the oral presentations due to shortage of funds. In that case, they can urge the authors to do that.

The thought-provoking letter of the author helped us to formulate a mini guide for a poster presentation. These are based on the suggestion by the author with additional inputs from us. This can be considered by the organizers and authors.

Steps for poster presentation in a conference [Figure 1]:{Figure 1}

Write down a full paper as is done for an oral presentation or manuscript for publicationWrite down the abstract only after writing the full paperUpload or send it to organizer's website or postal address according to guidelinesThe abstract passes through rigorous peer reviewRevise the abstract according to comments of the reviewers, if requestedRevised abstract get accepted for presentationMake a digital copy of the poster with the provision of editing. Review it multiple times for detection of any errors. Let all the authors review it for approval of final versionUpload it to a free digital repository (e.g., Zenodo) which stores your content and provides a digital object identifier (DOI) number[4]Use DOI in poster and share it with organizers so that they can link your digital copy in their records

Acknowledgment

We would like to thank Dr. Arpita Priyadarshini, Professor and Head of the Department, Department of Physiology, Govt. Medical College, Balangir, for providing us an insight of conference from an organizer's perspective.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

References

1Mondal H, Mondal S. Perspectives on poster as a presentation mode in conferences. J Curr Res Sci Med 2017;3:102-6.
2Heard S. For your next conference: Poster or talk? San Antonio, USA: UT Health Graduate School of Biomedical Science. Available from: http://www.gsbs.uthscsa.edu/blog/for-your-next-conference-poster-or-talk. [Last accessed on 2018 May 15].
3Quality and Value: The True Purpose of Peer Review. Nature; 2006. Available from: https://www.nature.com/nature/peerreview/debate/nature05032.html. [Last accessed on 2018 May 15].
4Zenodo. Switzerland: CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research. Available from: https://www.zenodo.org/. [Last accessed on 2018 May 15].