Abstract submissions for 2027 are anticipated to open around mid-February 2027. Please check back then. Thank you.

Students and faculty are invited to submit an abstract of no more than 300 words (excluding title, authors, acknowledgments, and keywords) for consideration. Please submit a separate abstract for each proposed poster. Abstracts with multiple authors need only one submission from a ‘primary’ author who will serve as the designated contact with conference organizers. Be sure that your submission has been proofread and is ready for print; if accepted, it will be published in this year’s abstract book.

Abstract Formats

Use one of the following abstract formats: (A) Research; (B) Clinical, Programmatic, or Policy Intervention; (C) Literature Review; or (D) Quality Initiative/Evidence-Based Practice Scholarly Project. Please limit the body of your abstract to no more than 300 words (excluding title, authors, acknowledgments, and keywords).

FORMAT A – Research

• Background: The study objectives, the hypothesis to be tested, or a description of the problem.
• Methods: Methods used, or approach taken (e.g., research design, sampling, procedures);
• Results: Specific results in summarized form (with statistical analysis when appropriate, promises such as ”to be completed” are not acceptable).
• Conclusions: Description of the main outcomes of the study and their implications, including suggestions for future research. Concluding statements such as ”the results will be discussed” are not acceptable.

(Grant acknowledgments should appear, but literature references should not appear in abstracts.)

FORMAT B – Clinical, Programmatic, or Policy Intervention

• Issue: A concise statement of the issue(s) or problem(s) addressed;
• Description: A description of the project, experience, education/training, service and/or advocacy;
• Lessons Learned: A summary of findings/outcomes which are supported by your observations or results (statistical analysis used to support the conclusions, where appropriate, should be included). Concluding statements such as ”the results will be discussed” are not acceptable.
• Next Steps: Recommendations for future research, clinical or programmatic intervention, or policy change and assessment.

(Grant acknowledgments should appear, but literature references should not appear in abstracts.)

FORMAT C – Literature Review

• Issue: A concise statement of the issue under investigation;
• Description: Specify the rationale for the literature review, type of analysis of studies, what aspects of the topic were investigated, the types of studies reviewed (with search engine queries and inclusion/exclusion criteria, where appropriate);
• Results: Specific findings;
• Conclusions and Recommendations: A summary of findings and lessons learned, suggestions for future research, assessment/management/clinical practice protocols, or policy.

(Grant acknowledgments should appear, but literature references should not appear in abstracts.)

FORMAT D – Quality Initiative/Evidence-Based Practice Scholarly Project

• Background: A description of the problem, clinical question, protocol, or other clinical issue and its significance/impact on clinical practice.
• Purpose: Goal(s)/objective(s) of the project
• Methods: Methods used, or approach taken (e.g., design, sampling, setting, measures, analysis);
• Results: Specific results/findings in summarized form, with statistical analysis when appropriate (Anticipated results are acceptable for doctoral proposals not yet completed).
• Conclusions: Description of the main outcomes of the project and their implications for clinical practice (may include project limitations and suggestions for future research, practice, or policy changes).

(Grant acknowledgments should appear, but literature references should not appear in abstracts.)

Examples

Example of FORMAT A – Research

Sensory Experiences Among Electronic Cigarette Users

• Background: We characterized the extent and quality of respiratory sensations and sensory related smoking cues associated with e-cigarette use among those who failed to quit combustible tobacco cigarette (CTC) use with traditional FDA approved medications but succeeded in doing so with e-cigarettes. Further, we sought to understand former smokers’ perceptions about the influence of sensory experience with e-cigarette use on CTC cessation outcomes.
• Methods: A nonrandom purposive sample of 156 participants recruited in the U.S. through the Consumer Advocates for Smoke Free Alternatives Association Facebook page completed an online cross-sectional survey to assess sensory experiences and smoking cues associated with e-cigarette use. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and the ANOVA/Kruskal-Wallis test with post-hoc testing and the two-sample t-test/Wilcoxon rank-sum test, as appropriate based on distribution, were used to assess the association between sample characteristics and sensory experiences and cues using investigator-constructed questions, the Modified Cigarette Evaluation Questionnaire (mCEQ) and the Smoking Cue Appeal Survey (SCAS).
• Results: With e-cigarette use, participants reported feeling the vapor in their throats, windpipes, noses, lungs, and on their tongues; reductions in nicotine craving; and enjoyment of their e-cigarette, including tasting, smelling, and seeing the vapor and touching the device. Women had greater craving reduction than men (p=0.023). Those who began smoking at 13 years of age or younger had more smoking satisfaction and had greater sensory enjoyment than those who began smoking at 16-17 years of age (p=0.015 and p=0.026, respectively), as well as greater sensory enjoyment than those who began smoking at 14-15 years of age (p=0.047). There was a significant overall association between the number of years a respondent smoked and e-cigarette sensory enjoyment (p=0.038). Participants 18-34 years old rated e-cigarettes as being more pleasant compared to 45+ year olds, (p=0.012). Eighty four percent of participants reported the sensation of the vapor as important in quitting CTCs, and 91% believed the sensations accompanying e-cigarette use contributed to their smoking cessation success.
• Conclusions: For those who failed to quit previously using approved cessation medications to stop smoking cigarettes, sensory experiences associated with e-cigarette use may help smokers quit smoking.
• Acknowledgements: This research was supported by the Doctoral Student’s Research Grant, CUNY Graduate Center.

Example of FORMAT B – Clinical, programmatic, or policy intervention

Corporations and Health Watch: A Resource for Changing Health Harming Corporate Practices 

• Issue: Corporate practices that harm health are increasingly leading to negative health outcomes and widening health disparities. While advocacy groups have endeavored to expose these corporate practices and reduce the public health impact of the promotion, retailing, design and pricing of products contributing to negative health outcomes, little has been done to document and analyze this work.
• Description: Tracking corporate practices that influence health in six major industries—alcohol, automobile, firearm, food and beverage, pharmaceutical, and tobacco—the Corporations and Health Watch (CHW) project documents and analyzes advocacy campaigns that have successfully changed corporate practices and health policies. The CHW website serves as a forum for public health researchers, advocates, students and others to exchange information, identify resources, and establish partnerships. Our poster will summarize our activities and lessons over the last two years.
• Lessons Learned: The CWH website provides a simple and effective vehicle for individuals across disciplines to communicate and collaborate in order to advance research and practice in this emerging field.
• Next Steps: The CHW project prepares case studies, campaign profiles, industry reviews, and campaign building resources as a tool to improve health outcomes. Future plans for research studies, scientific meetings and courses are described.

Example of FORMAT C – Literature review

A Literature Review of the Effects of Magnet Designation on Reported Nursing Burnout, Job Satisfaction and Perception of the Work Environment

• Issue: Although Magnet designation of facilities is considered a gold standard in quality of care, it is less clear if achieving Magnet status provides healthier working environments and decreases occupational burnout in nurses. This literature review addressed the following question: Among registered nurses, does working in a Magnet hospital compared to a non-Magnet or aspiring-Magnet hospital make a difference in the rate of reported nurse burnout, job satisfaction and views of work environment?
• Description: This systematic search and limited review of the research literature was conducted using CINAHL, Medline and the Cochrane Database. Keywords used included burnout, magnet hospitals and job satisfaction. Results included a systematic review, five cross-sectional secondary data analyses, three descriptive studies, and one qualitative study.
• Results: Key findings indicate that nurses in Magnet facilities compared to non-Magnet and aspiring-Magnet facilities reported lower rates of nurse burnout, increased job satisfaction and perception of better support from peer nurses, administration and physicians.
• Conclusions and Recommendations: Nurses who work in Magnet hospitals experience greater job satisfaction and less burnout than nurses who do not. There are advantages for hospitals that make an effort to achieve Magnet status even if not earned immediately. Future research can include longitudinal studies on whether perceptions of nurses from Magnet facilities change over time, and whether higher job satisfaction improves patient outcomes and satisfaction. Quality improvement measures such as a structured equation model can be incorporated in the Magnet design as a standard measure for improving health care environments, staff satisfaction, and patient outcomes.

Example of FORMAT D – Quality Initiative/Evidence-Based Practice Scholarly Project

The Cluster Care Model: An Innovative Method to Decrease CLABSIs in PICUs

• Background: Central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) are hospital acquired infections that promote both negative patient outcomes and prolong hospital length of stay. Research studies have been conducted and CLABSI maintenance bundles were created and initiated. Review of the literature has identified frequency of line access as a potential risk factor for CLABSIs.
• Purpose: To reduce the incidence of CLABSIs in the PICU by implementing an evidence-based cluster care model to support current CLABSI bundles and limit the frequency of daily access to central lines.
• Methods: An audit tool was used to measure compliance with CLABSI bundles. Gaps in knowledge were identified through pre – and post – test surveys. Staff were educated on identified barriers to compliance. PICU nurses were trained on incorporating the cluster care model into practice. A unit-based surveillance tool was used to measure CLABSI rates pre and post intervention.
• Results: Decreased compliance in CLABSI maintenance bundles was noted. Post education data showed an increase in knowledge as well as compliance. The cluster care model was successfully incorporated by the nursing staff, limiting the frequency of line access. The surveillance tool found a decrease in CLABSI rates following this implementation.
• Conclusions: A reduction of CLABSI rates post implementation of the cluster care model successfully demonstrated the positive correlation between frequency of line access and CLABSIs as well as the need for current CLABSI bundles to include methods for limiting line access.

For more examples, see last year’s abstract book.

Abstract Rubric

Refer to our abstract rubric for additional guidelines in preparing a quality abstract.

Poster Presentations

Presenters with accepted abstracts are invited to share their work in a juried poster session. See our poster guidelines for instructions, examples, and a poster presentation rubric.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.