Abstract Submission Closed

Researchers and SRHR practitioners who have completed SRHR studies in or about Africa on any of the sub-themes/Tracks and are interested in presenting at the conference both orally or through a poster should send their abstracts to set-srhr@musph.ac.ug no later than 30th of September 2020. Abstracts should be written in English, presented in Microsoft word format, and should not exceed 350 words. Researchers/SRHR practitioners with work/studies in Ecology and SRHR, Rights based approaches and SRHR and Governance of SRHR are highly encouraged to submit. For more information on subthemes/tracks see here https://setsrhrconference.org/blog/.

The conference offers two options for abstract submission:

  1. Option I: Research related abstracts

This is suited for research conducted in all disciplines. It should contain concise statements of:

  • Title: the abstract should have a title, author(s) and institutional affiliation(s). Where a team is involved, indicate the leader and corresponding author (if different from the team leader) and attach the corresponding author’s updated curriculum vitae;
  • Background: Indicate the purpose and objective of the research, the hypothesis that was tested, or a description of the problem being analysed or evaluated;
  • Methodology: Describe the study period, setting and location, study design, study population, data collection and methods of analysis used;
  • Results: Present as clearly and in as much detail as possible the findings and/or outcomes of the study. Please disaggregate data by age and gender where possible and summarize specific results;
  • Conclusions: Explain the significance of your study’s findings and/or outcomes for SRHR outcomes and future implications of the results.

The following review criteria will be used in scoring abstracts submitted under Option 1:

  • Is there a clear background and justified objective?
  • Is the methodology and/or study design appropriate for the objectives?
  • Are the results important and clearly presented?
  • Are the conclusions supported by the results?
  • Is the study original and does it contribute to the field?
  • Option 2: Program related abstracts

This is suited for lessons learned through programmes. It should contain concise statements of:

  • Title: the abstract should have a title, author(s) and institutional affiliation(s). Where a team is involved, indicate the leader and corresponding author (if different from the team leader) and attach the corresponding author’s updated curriculum vitae;
  • Background: Summarize the purpose, scope and objectives of the programme, project or policy.
  • Description: Describe the programme, project or policy period, setting and location, the structure, key population (if applicable) and interventions undertaken in support of the programme, project or policy.
  • Lessons learned: Present as clearly and in as much detail as possible the findings and/or outcomes of the programme, project or policy. Include an analysis or evaluation of lessons learned and best practices. Please summarize any specific results that support your lessons learned and best practices.
  • Conclusions/ next steps: Explain the significance of the findings and/or outcomes of the programme, project or policy for SRHR service delivery and future implications of the results.

The following review criteria will apply to abstracts submitted under Option 2:

  • Is there a clear background and justified objective?
  • Is the programme, project or policy design and implementation appropriate for the objectives?
  • Are the lessons or best practices important, supported by the findings and clearly presented?
  • Are the conclusions/next steps supported by the results and are they feasible?
  • Is the work reported original and does it contribute to the field?

In case an abstract has been previously published or presented at any meeting, the author is required to indicate details of the publication or presentation. This information will be considered by the review committee when making final decisions.

The conference organisers regard plagiarism as a serious professional misconduct. All abstracts will be screened for plagiarism and when identified, the abstract and any other abstracts submitted by the same author will be rejected. Only those whose abstracts are successful will be invited.

%d bloggers like this: