Abstract submission for the 27th ECVIM-CA scientific programme in St. Julian's, Malta will be on-line from the 1st of February 2017.
You will be informed about the decision before the 7th of July 2017.
Abstracts must be submitted on-line via the abstract submission module. The deadline for receipt of the abstracts is 23.59 GMT April 15, 2017, and the online abstract submission site will be deactivated as of 00.00 GMT on April 16, 2017.
Click here to submit your abstract!
Before submitting, please check carefully that your abstract complies with format guidelines as no further changes are allowed after submission. Non compliance with format requirements will lead to automatic rejection.
Acknowledging successful submission
When your abstract is successfully submitted, you will receive an acknowledgement by email, containing details of the exact submission (including title, co-authors, and text). If you don't receive an email within a few minutes please contact the secretariat via: firstname.lastname@example.org
Research communications should report recent clinical research, which is original in nature. Reviews will not be accepted, and you are strongly discouraged from submitting preliminary results from ongoing trials. Further, whilst we may consider case reports as research abstracts, these must be of an exceptional (ground-breaking) nature. Abstracts containing any form of advertisement will be rejected. No abstract may be submitted that has been previously published or presented at an international European or American meeting. Abstracts presented at national meetings may be submitted but the same abstract presented at two separate meetings will only count as one presentation for the purposes of credentialling. Contents must be significantly different or include new information if a similar abstract was presented earlier. During the abstract-upload process, you will need to list all co-authors for your abstract.
Statement of Disclosures
At the time of abstract submission, we now require all abstract presenters to provide a statement, on behalf of all co-authors, regarding any disclosures for their work. This enables congress attendees to determine whether or not there may have been bias or the perception of bias. This can occur when any of the authors (or someone related to the authors e.g. family member, spouse, friend) has a relationship with any entity that has an interest (direct or indirect) related to the submission. Examples include:
- Any form of support (financial or otherwise) for the study described in the abstract
- Any form of support for other work that that the authors are involved in.
- Financial relationships (which may be unrelated to the subject matter of the abstract) whereby the individual or a relative benefits by receiving a salary, royalties, consulting fees, speaker honoraria, ownership interests (e.g. stock or stock options), or other benefits.
- Indirect benefits i.e. where the author, or author's institution, benefits from the results of the study. An example would be where the author (or their institution) runs a laboratory service, which performs an assay that is discussed in the abstract.
- Failure to declare a conflict of interest can lead to rejection of the abstract, or prohibiting authors from submitting abstracts to future congresses.
Please note that it is best to practise 'full disclosure' and err on the side of caution; if in doubt, please include the item, and the Congress Committee will then decide whether or not it needs to be reported. Please include in the text box provided an explanation that includes the name(s) of the author(s) involved, name of the commercial entity, and the nature of the relationship.
Every speaker must also display their disclosures on the second slide of their presentation (i.e. immediately following the title slide). Please see the link for an example disclosure slide. Speakers who do not comply with this will be prohibited from presenting at future congresses.
Ethical approval of your study
ECVIM requires each abstract author to complete an ethical statement. Abstract submission is only possible after this ethical statement is submitted.
Please choose one of the following options:
1. Official ethical approval form (signed) submitted
2. Although this study involves a prospective evaluation or invasive procedures (e.g. samples obtained by any procedure similarly or more invasive than needle insertion) or procedures not done for direct benefit of the patients, no ethical approval was obtained for the following reason(s): (please state your reasons)
3. No ethical approval was obtained because this study did not involve a prospective evaluation, did not involve laboratory animals and only involved non-invasive procedures (e.g. faecal samples, voided urine etc).
Submission of a signed official ethical approval is mandatory for any study performed on laboratory animals and for any cross-sectional or prospective study performed on client-owned animals involving invasive procedures (e.g. samples obtained by any procedure similarly or more invasive than needle insertion) or any procedure not performed for the direct benefit of the patient.
Proof of ethical approval should be provided in the form of a copy of a formal, dated and signed approval letter from your local ethics committee. In case the approval is not in English, the ECVIM Congress committee may request a translation, if deemed necessary.
If surplus material (i.e. from samples obtained for diagnostic purposes) was used, but you did not obtain ethical approval, please clarify this by ticking the second option, and provide a justification. In such cases, the justification must be credible i.e. the benefit of the procedure to the animal must be logical and appropriate to the case, and would be acceptable if it were explained to a layperson.
ECVIM reserves the right to reject any abstracts not meeting the above criteria, where proof of ethical review is not provided along with the abstract, or where left-over samples are used but the justification for exemption from review is not credible.
If you are planning a research study, please consider that, more likely than not, proof of ethical review will be required. Going through the process of ethical scrutiny provides assurance to the participants and to the publishers of research that ethical issues have been carefully assessed and the design and conduct of the research meets agreed standards.
Ethical review can only be effectively carried out prior to the research being conducted.
Ethical issues may arise from many areas such as:
•Recruitment of patients
•Data collection and protection; questionnaires
•Ownership of data or clinical material
•Any potential to cause harm or distress to an animal or owner participating in a research study
•Breaching confidentiality of the owner of an animal during the conduct of the research or its publication
•Need for informed consent
•Study designs where decision-making is determined by the study design (e.g. randomisation) rather than the attending veterinary surgeon
For additional information on ethical issues in clinical research you can consult the RCVS-BVA joint statement on ethical review for practice-based research http://www.rcvs.org.uk/publications/ethical-review-for-practice-based-research/ .
By submitting a research communication and submission form, the author(s) transfer copyright ownership so it can be published in the on-line congress proceedings, JVIM or JVCO.
All abstracts will be evaluated by the relevant society using the following criteria: scientific content, experimental design, animal welfare, and relevance to small animal medicine. The corresponding author will be notified about the decision before 7th of July 2017.
Format - layout
The abstract MUST be between 200 and 400 words in length (excluding title and author details).The format of the abstract is flexible, but should contain information on the aim of the work, methods, results and conclusions. A statement that “the results will be discussed” is not acceptable. Do not use subheadings (methods, results, etc.). Tables, graphs and figures are NOT allowed. Do not use subheadings in bold.
*** PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING SECTION CAREFULLY AS THIS IS A COMMON SOURCE OF MISTAKES! ***
Firstly, please note that abstracts are not edited after approval. Therefore, we advise you to proofread your abstract carefully before submission, since it will be printed exactly as submitted.
Also, once the abstract has been reviewed, changes to the abstract cannot be accepted. If an error is subsequently identified, you are free to withdraw your abstract if you wish. During the abstract-upload process, you will need to list all co-authors for your abstract.
ONE MORE TIME, please note that, after an abstract has undergone review and has been accepted, we cannot accept any changes in authorship, titles or the content of the abstract etc. Research communications are automatically rejected without further scrutiny if they:
•Are not submitted on-line
•Are received after closing date (April 15, 2017)
•Contain fewer than 200 words (excluding title and author details)
•Exceed 400 words in length (excluding title and author details)
•Are published or accepted elsewhere before April 15, 2017
•Are not written in scientific English
•Are too preliminary in nature or are deemed to be of low scientific quality
•Contain tables, graphs or figures
•Are not relevant to small animal internal medicine
•Are deemed to be unethical
•Containsubheadings in bold
•If you should have any questions, please contact the congress secretary (email@example.com).