Abstract deadline: November 10th 2017, 23h59
Submit your abstract here.
To facilitate the blinded peer review process and to ensure that abstracts are properly formatted, we suggest you to use our new developed template. This template already fulfils the criteria of the margins and fonts described below.
Please note that attempts were made to accommodate submission of your abstracts prepared for the general ISMRM meeting by matching the guidelines as close as possible. Due to major changes in their submission system in the past few years, we are unable to exactly match these guidelines.
Example abstract including format guidelines: open pdf
- During submission, a file is uploaded which contains the title, authors, affiliation, body, references and acknowledgements. The SYNOPSIS (max 100 words) will be uploaded separately in a data entry field at the upload site.
- The uploaded abstract file must be in .doc, or .docx B4 format (25.7 x 36.4 cm) and be made in this template.
- The uploaded abstract file name should be “Firstname_LastName” of the first author.
Do not include spaces in the abstract name as this will cause an error during the submission process.
- Margins: Please follow the margins that are already in the template.
- Fonts: Please use Times New Roman with minimal font size 8 pt (fonts for figure legends should also not be smaller than 8 pt).
- The text should be formatted in one column across the page. The entire abstract text must not exceed 750 words (excluding figure legends, tables and title).
- Figures (includes tables): Please do not exceed the maximum of 5 figures per abstract, and ensure that the figures fit onto the page along with text. Figure legends must not exceed 50 words per figure.
- The total file size should not exceed 6 MB.
SUGGESTED ISMRM Benelux Chapter abstract format:
Include within your abstract the following sections. In each section, answer the question listed below. (Do not repeat the actual question in the body of your abstract.)
- PURPOSE – “Why was this study/research performed?”
- METHODS – “How has this problem been studied?”
- RESULTS – “Principal data and statistical analysis”
- DISCUSSION – “What is the interpretation of the data?”
- CONCLUSION – “What is the relevance to clinical practice or future research?”
- REFERENCES – References are optional, using the suggested style below.
(Please note this is only a guideline, understanding that some abstracts will not necessarily lend themselves to this format)
Citations in the body of the abstract
Cite each source in numerical order using superscript Arabic numerals (1, 2, 3…).
- Example 1: A review of regulations has been complete by the WHO15.
- Example 2: The data were as follows3,4:
- Example 3: As previously reported,11-14,25
Citations in the reference list
At the end of the document, list references numerically in the order by which they were cited in the text.
- Example 1: 1. Rainier S, Thomas D, Tokarz D, et al. Myofibrillogenesis regulator 1 gene mutations cause paroxysmal dystonic choreoathetosis. Arch Neurol. 2004;61(7):1025‐1029.
- Example 2: 2. World Health Organization. Injury: A Leading Cause of the Global Burden of Disease, 2000. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2002.
- Example 3: 3. Weiss R. The promise of precision prescriptions. Washington Post. June 24, 2000:A1. http://www.washingtonpost.com. Accessed October 10, 2001.
General Content Guidelines
- The content may not promote the proprietary interests of any commercial entity. Evident bias in favor of a particular product or company is grounds for rejection.
- Content must be restricted to pure science, industry issues and operation of devices, Product /company names should be included only to identify the MR hardware/software/ peripherals used, but not to promote proprietary interests (see Point 1)
- All recommendations involving clinical medicine must be based on evidence that is accepted within the profession of medicine as adequate justification for their indications and contraindications in the care of patients.
- All scientific research referred to, reported or used in support or justification of a patient care recommendation must conform to generally accepted standards of experimental design, data collection and analysis.
- The Proceedings will be published electronically on this website. The full text of all accepted abstracts will be available online two weeks before the meeting to pre-registered attendees only. If you wish to have access to the Proceedings before the meeting, you must pre-register.
- All submitted abstracts are treated as confidential from the time of submission to the publication date, 15th January 2018.
- All copyrights to accepted abstracts become the property of ISMRM Benelux Chapter. No proprietary information may be withheld by authors.
- Innovation/novelty, advancement of knowledge, and/or improvement of clinical capabilities.
- Data: The data should be substantive and not just implied.
- Organization of presentation (hypothesis or objectives, methods, results, discussion/conclusions.)
- Abstracts should have relevance for current or future application.
- Quality of presentation (spelling, format, grammar).
- Bias: Evident bias in favor of a particular product or company is grounds for rejection. (Use of a particular company’s products or equipment in itself does not represent bias. Non-data-driven statements of superiority, however, would be considered biased.)
- Evidence that is accepted within the profession. All recommendations involving clinical medicine must be based on evidence that is accepted within the profession of medicine as adequate justification for their indications and contraindications in the care of patients.
- Conformance to generally accepted standards of experimental design. All scientific research referred to, reported or used in support or justification of a patient care recommendation must conform to generally accepted standards of experimental design, data collection and analysis.
- Repetition of Content. Multiple submissions of the same or nearly the same abstract is grounds for rejection.
Additional Important Points
Number of Abstracts per Author
Each first author is allowed to send in only one abstract! Additional abstracts of the same first author will NOT be reviewed, so make sure to send in your finest work ONLY!
A 100-word synopsis of each abstract must be submitted. It should include a brief summary of the problem, methods, results, and conclusions. The synopsis must include text only, without equations or images and be without references or citations to items described in the full abstract. To conserve space and provide authors greater opportunity to clarify their projects, the synopsis should NOT appear in the actual abstract.
By choosing a review category, you enable us to assign your abstract to the most appropriate reviewers, and to construct unified and logical scientific sessions at the meeting. However, not every abstract fits neatly into a single category, and sometimes identification of a secondary category might be helpful during the review and program construction process and ensures that your abstract is sent to the optimal combination of reviewers, with the most relevant expertise to the content of your abstract. If you feel that your abstract belongs in more than one category, you can indicate a second area of review or emphasis.
Authors of accepted abstracts will be invited to present their work to the community. This can be in the form of an oral presentation in a scientific session, a traditional (paper) poster presentation, or a ‘power pitch’. The power pitches consist of a short plenary elevator-pitch style presentation, and a traditional poster presentation.
Failure to Present
Submission of an abstract is considered a commitment to present the abstract if it is accepted. Failure to present an abstract may jeopardize future submissions by the same author or institution.