The Call for Papers for the 47th NAPCRG Annual Meeting will open approximately the first week of February 2019. The projected deadline for submissions is April 14, 2019. Stay tuned for more details!
You are invited to submit a proposal to present a paper, poster, workshop or forum at the 47th NAPCRG Annual Meeting in Toronto, Ontario on November 16-19, 2019. Proposals on any topic relating to primary care research are welcome from researchers throughout North America and the rest of the world. Regarding poster submissions, we give considerable time to poster sessions, have more space than is typical at meetings, and as such you are likely to receive more direct feedback and potential collaborators from a poster presentation than from an oral presentation in a parallel session.
Reviewers are wanted: If you’re interested in serving as a reviewer for NAPCRG 2019, please click here to submit your name.
Our CME requires each submission to include at least 2 learning objectives. Please follow these instructions!
Learning Objectives: List at least 2 learning objectives using these guidelines:
- Clearly describe what you want learners to take away and implement after the session in active, measurable terms (e.g. - define, interpret, explain, apply).
- Each objective must be specific, concise, and limited to one sentence.
- Example - "On completion of this session, participants should be able to identify and describe the three primary tenets of the Patient Self-Efficacy Model”.
General Rules for All Submissions
Submissions must meet all the requirements of the proposed category. A non- refundable submission fee of $20 US is required for each submission. NAPCRG accepts VISA, MasterCard, and American Express. Research that has been published at the time of abstract submission or presented at another national or international meeting is not acceptable. All presenters must register for the conference and pay the appropriate registration fees. Submissions must be entered using the online submission process located at www.napcrg.org no later than April 14, 2019.
The Program Committee will consider proposals for a Symposium. This will consist of 5 research presentations on a related topic, followed by a discussant who will comment on the research and facilitate discussion. If you would like to propose a Symposium, please email firstname.lastname@example.org at the time of submission giving the titles of the papers, the presenting authors, and a proposed discussant. The Program Committee will consider the request, additionally each paper will still be considered individually for acceptance on its own merits.
To accommodate as many presenters as possible, the NAPCRG Program Committee reserves the right to limit each presenter to only one presentation. However, anyone may be listed as a co-author on multiple papers and may present another person’s paper if the original presenter is not able to attend. Acknowledgment of receipt of submissions will be emailed automatically after you complete your submission. Letters of acceptance will be emailed by July 1, 2019. Questions? Contact Jill Haught at email@example.com.
Oral Presentation on Completed Research:
If you are submitting an abstract in this category, the research must be complete at the time of the Call for Papers submission deadline. Oral presentations will be given in concurrent sessions and will be grouped by topic based on the categories selected during the submission process. A maximum of 15 minutes – 10 for presentation and 5 for discussion and transition to the next paper – will be allotted for individual oral presentations. The Program Committee reserves the right to convert “Oral Presentations on Completed Research” from podium presentations to “Posters on Completed Research” based on suitability and/or the need to limit each presenter’s podium presentations.
Selected high impact, high quality oral presentations will be selected for presentation in an extended format to a larger audience as a “Distinguished Paper”. The authors of the top 20 rated abstracts will be contacted by June 18th to submit a 2-page extended abstract by July 11th. These extended abstracts will be reviewed by the Program Committee, which will select the final distinguished papers. Several selection factors are considered, including overall excellence, quality of research methods, quality of the writing, relevance to primary care clinical research, and overall impact of the research on primary care and/or clinical practice. These papers will be presented from the podium to the full conference in an extended format (15 - 20 minutes for presentation plus 5-10 minutes for questions depending on time available in the program). Some of these papers will also be eligible for an international travel award for presentation at other meetings.
Poster on Completed Research:
If you are submitting an abstract in this category, the research must be complete at the time of the Call for Papers submission deadline. Poster presentations will be scheduled to avoid any overlap with oral presentations or other events, to maximize contact between researchers. Presenters are asked to attend their posters during designated times during NAPCRG.
Poster on Research in Progress:
If you are submitting an abstract in this category, the research must be in progress at the time of the Call for Papers submission deadline. If your research is in progress at the time of the submission deadline but will be complete by the meeting, you should still submit your abstract as a poster on research in progress. Poster presentations will be scheduled to avoid any overlap with oral presentations or other events, to maximize contact between researchers. Presenters are asked to attend their posters during designated periods.
Workshops will be scheduled as 90-minute sessions and will run concurrently with other sessions. Workshops should be presentations on research methodology or research skills development that must involve audience participation. In some years, the number of workshops that we are able to schedule may be limited by available space and time.
Forums are informal 3-hour sessions designed to provide researchers with an opportunity to discuss challenges encountered while applying for funding or conducting a project. Researchers with similar interests can share ideas regarding methodology, sampling, statistical methods, planning studies, etc. In some years, the number of forums that we are able to schedule may be limited by available space and time.
Preconference workshops are a select group of half‐day or full-day sessions that do not fit into the format of the conference schedule. Preconference workshops may be presentations on research methodology or skills development, new initiatives in primary care research, and generally should involve audience participation. (See below for additional requirements.)
Abstracts Requirements for all Submissions
Length: Limit abstract to 350 words. (Do not include the title and authors).
Language: Abstracts must be in English.
Format: Type the body of the abstract as one paragraph. The abstract must be written in the third person. The abstract should contain the appropriate subheadings described below. The abstract should not contain references, or acknowledgments. Abstracts will be published as submitted. Before submitting your abstract, check carefully to make sure it contains no spelling or typographical errors. Type your abstract in a text document and then copy and paste it into the abstract field during the online submission process. Do not type your abstract directly into the abstract field as this will take too much time and the page may time out forcing you to restart the process.
Abstract Format for Oral Presentations and Posters:
Oral and poster presentations should use a structured abstract as described below. It should be formatted in a single paragraph no more than 350 words in length, as shown below:
Context: The abstract should begin with a sentence or two summarizing the rationale for the study, providing the clinical (or other) reason for the study question. In addition, the author should give a sentence or two about the importance of this work to family medicine/primary care. Objective: State the objective or study question/hypothesis addressed. If more than one objective is addressed, the main objective should be indicated, and only key secondary objectives stated. Study Design: Describe the basic design of the study. In general, use one of the following descriptors: randomized controlled trial, quasi-experimental trial, cohort study, case control study, case series, survey, systematic review, meta-analysis, diagnostic accuracy study, ecologic study, economic analysis, qualitative study, or mixed-methods study. Setting or Dataset: Describe the study setting such as community or population-based, primary care or specialty, inpatient, intensive care unit, emergency department, or hospitalized care. For secondary data-analyses and systematic reviews, indicate the data source. Population studied: Briefly describe the inclusion and exclusion criteria and the number of participants (or studies) included. Intervention/Instrument (for interventional studies): Describe the essential features of any interventions. Examples include a drug name, surgical procedure, diagnostic test, or counseling intervention. Outcome Measures: Give the primary study outcome and any key secondary outcomes. Results: Give the main results of the study. The results should be quantified where appropriate (e.g. relative risks, absolute risk reduction, likelihood ratios). If research is in progress, state anticipated results. Conclusions: Report only those conclusions of the study that are directly supported by the evidence, along with any implications for clinical practice. Avoid speculation and overgeneralization. Equal emphasis should be given to positive and negative findings of equal scientific merit. Note: For brevity, parts of the abstract should be written in phrases rather than complete sentences. (e.g., “Design: Double-blind randomized trial,” rather than “Design: The study was conducted as a double-blind, randomized trial.”). For “Poster presentation on research in progress”, omit the Conclusions section and briefly describe outcomes to be reported.
Abstract Format for Preconference Workshops, Workshops & Forums:
Abstracts for Preconference Workshops, Workshops, and Forums should use a structured abstract as described below. It should be formatted in a single paragraph, as shown below:
Rationale: Explain why this session is important and relevant for NAPCRG members, in the context of the health system and current research. Participation: Describe how the session will involve the audience. Workshops and forums must include some degree of audience participation. Content to be Presented: Describe the content to be presented. Method of Evaluation: Describe the method of evaluation. Prerequisite Knowledge: Note whether or not any previous experience or knowledge is needed. If none is needed, state so.
If the submission is a Preconference Workshop, the following information is also needed:
Audience: Describe your audience, who and how many you expect to attend, and the basis for this estimate. Rationale: What is the proposed content area and why is it important to members of NAPCRG? Schedule – Describe the schedule, including the time frame, content of each section, and method of evaluation. Preconferences generally run ½ day (~3-4 hours) or an entire day (~ 7-8 hours). Why a Preconference? Explain why this program should be presented as a preconference workshop rather than taking place within the normal meeting format (i.e., workshops and forum). Endorsement: Preconference workshops must be endorsed by the chair of a NAPCRG Special Interest Group or Committee if the workshop topic relates to an existing SIG or committee. This is intended to facilitate communication and awareness of members and groups working on activities of common interest.
Each submission will be reviewed by at least 2 NAPCRG members and rated from 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest possible score. Oral presentations and posters on completed research will be rated based on methodologic rigor, the significance of the topic and research to primary care, its novelty and innovation, and the validity of the results. Posters on research in progress will be judged using the same criteria, minus validity of the results. Workshops and forum will be evaluated based on their relevance to NAPCRG attendees, importance to the field, interactivity, innovation, and the need to provide a balance and mix of topics to attendees.