Back to 2024 congress

Abstract submission

  • All abstracts must be submitted exclusively through the online platform before 29th March at 23:59h. (GMT+1)
  • Authors will be notified by the EVCBMAW Scientific Committee by 28th May.
  • Authors are required to confirm their acceptance and participation in the conference by June 7th 2023.
  • Abstracts received after this deadline or submitted by email/post will not be considered.
  • A confirmation email is received upon submission with the reference number of the abstract by abstract2023@evcbmaw.org. In case you don’t receive it, please check your SPAM folder or contact that email address.

CATEGORIES OF ABSTRACT

Long spoken presentations.
(20 minutes, plus 5 minutes discussion)

 
– e.g. data-based, original finished scientific research or reviews ready for publication;

Short spoken presentations.
(10 minutes, plus 3 minutes discussion)

 
– e.g., significant and discussed case reports, treatment regimes, data-based content or other material about ongoing research.

Poster presentations 


– e.g., case reports, treatment regimes, data-based content or other material. Authors have the opportunity to give a 2-min presentation on their poster (poster teaser, not mandatory).

  • A maximum of 1 abstract as a spoken presentation per stream (i.e., Animal Welfare Science, Ethics and Law AWSEL / Behavioural Medicine BM / AWSEL+BM) can be submitted by one individual presenter.

  • In addition, up to 2 posters can be presented by one individual person per stream (although the same person can be the co-author of more than 2 posters).

  • Presenting authors (for both spoken and poster presentations) must be registered and present at the Congress.

  • Based on the analysis of the EVCBMAW Scientific Committee, the abstract may be accepted for a different category than the one suggested by the authors (e.g. a spoken presentation may be accepted as a poster, or authors might be requested to present an abstract intended for poster as a spoken presentation).

TYPE OF ABSTRACT

Based on the type of content/focus, abstracts can be divided into:

These should include the following components:

  1. Introduction –- very brief introduction of the study and its objectives
  2. Methodology – including a description of participants (both human and animal), such as number (n), type, age, gender, and species, and a description of the study design, data collection, data analysis and apparatus used. This may include qualitative research, papers on ethical analysis, and law reports
  3. Results – the abstract must include sufficient information (e.g, numerical and statistical data) to allow an evaluation by reviewers and Academic Committee and to enable it to stand as a published abstract. Expressions such as “data will be presented” or “findings will be discussed” are not acceptable and will result in automatic rejection of the abstract.
  4. Principal conclusions and implications for the field
  5. References list
  6. Approval by ethical committee: provide number or explain why the approval was not necessary
  7. If data/results are not presented, explain the reason
  8. Statistical analysis: if missing, please explain the reason
  9. If results were already published, even partially, please explain the difference with the present submission
  10. Declare any conflict of interest
  11. Declare funding resources/no funding

These should include the following components:

  1. Introduction (a clear statement of the purpose of the review)
  2. Methodology for literature search
  3. Key literature references to theory, concepts, evidence or methodology that have been reviewed or re-evaluated, stressing the critical aspects
  4. Main findings
  5. Principal conclusions and implications for the field
  6. References list
  7. If results were already published, even partially, please explain the difference with the present submission
  8. Declare any conflict of interest
  9. Declare funding resources/no funding

These should include the following components:

  1. Introduction
  2. Literature review or an indication of the absence of literature in the area examined. Discussion of choice of framework/ethical construct and motivation e.g. deontological, utilitarian, value-based etc. (A lot of ethical material in the veterinary sphere has not been properly considered)
  3. Principal conclusions and implications for the field
  4. References list
  5. If results were already published, even partially, please explain the difference with the present submission
  6. Declare any conflict of interest
  7. Declare funding resources/no funding

These should include the following components:

  1. Introduction – considering national or international legislation
  2. Current legislation and its application / Jurisdictional direction (e.g. UK Case Law set precedent, in Napoleonic code less important?)
  3. Principal conclusions and implications for the legislature
  4. References list
  5. If results were already published, even partially, please explain the difference with the present submission
  6. Declare any conflict of interest
  7. Declare funding resources/no funding

These should include the following components:

  1. Introduction (anamnesis, aetiology)
  2. Key literature references to theory, concepts, evidence or methodology
  3. Diagnosis, case management, and evidence base
  4. Principal conclusions and implications for the field
  5. References list
  6. If results were already published, even partially, please explain the difference with the present submission
  7. Declare any conflict of interest
  8. Declare funding resources/no funding


IMPORTANT INFORMATION

  • Please, state in the system who will be the corresponding author (contact person). This person will receive all the notifications and will handle correspondence at all stages of reviewing, publication and post-publication.
  • Please, state in the system who will be the presenting author. This person will present the abstract. Presenting authors whose abstracts (spoken and poster) have been accepted must register for the Congress. Failure to do so will result in exclusion from the Congress program and proceedings.
  • The corresponding and presenting author can coincide. 
    IMPORTANT: Note that one author may submit and appear as co-author in several abstracts but ONLY WILL BE ALLOWED TO PRESENT ONE SPOKEN PRESENTATION PER STREAM and 2 POSTER PRESENTATIONS PER STREAM.
  • Authors are requested to indicate their preference for the type of presentation during submission. However, the final status will be decided by the Scientific Committee.
  • Authors are requested to indicate the stream they would like to submit the abstract to; however, the stream might be changed if another one is considered more appropriate and fitting by the Scientific Committee.
  • The EVCBMAW Scientific Committee supports only research that has been conducted according to the protocol approved by the institutional or local committee on ethics in animal and human investigation. Where no such committee exists, the research should have been conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki of the World Medical Association. If your answer is “no” or “not applicable”, you will be required to provide a written explanation for your answer. The EVCBMAW Organizing Committee may enquire further into ethical aspects when evaluating abstracts.

ABSTRACT FORMATTING INSTRUCTIONS AND INFO TO BE INCLUDED

Abstracts submitted not according to these guidelines will not be accepted.

All abstracts should be submitted and presented in clear, good English with accurate grammar and spelling of a quality suitable for publication. Either British or American English are accepted, but not a mix of them. No editing for language will be carried out by the Scientific Committee.

General rules for the submission of abstracts are in place: e.g. when using uncommon abbreviations, spell out in full when first mentioned, followed by the abbreviation in parentheses; do not abbreviate in the title of the abstract; do not include tables or diagrams in the abstract.

Please note that references are mandatory for reviews and highly recommended also in other types of abstracts, when statements are reported and a link to literature increases its strength (to avoid personal opinions).

Abstracts must be submitted using the dedicated platform, in which authors are requested to insert all the information below by completing the appropriate fields.


WHAT SHOULD HAVE MY ABSTRACT?
  • Type of presentation: long spoken / short spoken / poster with teaser / poster without teaser
  • Stream: BM / AWSEL / BM+AWSEL
  • Type of abstract: research / critical review / ethical / law-based / case report, series or study
  • Title of the abstract (max 180 characters)
  • Name of all authors: first name + initial middle name(s) + surname of each author; when more authors are present, separate them with a comma; initial letters in capital; after the surnames, indicate a number for the affiliation corresponding to those of the dedicated field (e.g. Mary D. Ainsworth1, Gary Cooper1, William B. Pitt2)
  • Name and email address of corresponding author
  • Name and email address of presenting author
  • Affiliations of all authors, reporting the number and then the details; full address is not needed (e.g. 1 Dep. Veterinary Sciences, University of Pisa (I), 2 XXX, Madrid (E))
  • Main text of abstracts, that cannot exceed 250 words (excluding title, name of authors, affiliations and references)
  • References in the text should be reported as increasing number, in order of appearance, between square brackets; use commas to separate two numbers or hyphen to separate more consecutive numbers (e.g. [1, 2, 4-7])
  • Reference list: please report the number of references as in the main text and all details following https://www.mdpi.com/files/authors/mdpi_references_guide.pdf
  • All references should be cited in the text by number and reported in the reference list.
  • Other fields have to be completed. These fields have been introduced to make the reviewing process easier, smother and quicker, asking authors to inform reviewers about points that are often raised during reviewing. For all the following fields, authors can provide about (e.g. indicate the presence or justify the absence): ethical review/approval; data/results; statistical analysis; previous presentation/publication of data; conflict of interest; funding resources

REVIEWING PROCESS

For questions regarding the submission of abstracts please contact: abstract2023@evcbmaw.org

SUBMIT HERE

FEAR FREE AWARD FOR EVCBMAW 2023

The Fear Free Research Award is intended to stimulate, recognize and spotlight exceptional research aimed at building and advancing the science and knowledge toward creating a veterinary experience that is free from fear, anxiety and stress, for pets, owners and their health care providers.  All abstracts submitted either for spoken presentations or posters will qualify for consideration for the Fear Free award, if they directly relate to the subject of prevention, reduction or assessment of fear, anxiety, and stress in dogs, cats, birds and / or horses associated with veterinary health care.  The highest graded project will receive the award of $1000 US.