1. Title of the Abstract/Project Names and Affiliations of Authors Venue Date

2. Background and Rationale for the Study/Project Identify the clinical problem the project addresses Provide a very brief summary of the background literature Include a study hypothesis on this slide, or on a separate slide The literature review should be referenced – can be as simple as a “name, year” with a separate slide at the end

3. Methods Identify the study setting IRB/ethics approvals/informed consent Characteristics of participants – Inclusionary criteria – Exclusionary criteria Bold, italics, and color can highlight important features of your data Avoid writing sentences – you will be tempted to read your slides

4. Methods Interventional Procedures – A table or figure of the design, group assignments, tests, etc. can save space and looks good Study Outcomes/Tests Data Analysis – Statistics, post-hoc tests, p- value – If space is tight, include on a separate page Be careful Fonts too small… Not to make Include references for outcome measures, so the audience can look up the metrics

5. Results Provide a list of the study findings – What was completed – Demographic findings/baseline characteristics – Keep results focused on the findings – leave interpretation to the discussion – Any font less than 20-point is difficult to read in a presentation

6. Use 2 or fewer figures per slide to show your results – anything more can be too busy or small, and detract from your message

7. Results, cont Scoring Weight (%) Needs Improvement: 0-1 points Acceptable: 2-3 points Outstanding: 4-5 points Introduction and Significance of the Problem 15Research has limited significance or clinical need is poorly described. Research has clinical appeal, but need or goals are not well addressed. Research has a broad appeal, and need and goals are well described. Approach and Methodology 25No hypothesis stated. Methods do not appear appropriate to address the research question, poorly described, and hard to follow. Hypothesis stated; use of descriptive design. Methods are appropriate for the research question, but would be hard to reproduce from the description given. Hypothesis driven; use of experimental design. Methods are very appropriate, and implementation is well-described. Could be easily reproduced. Results /Findings 10Results are incomplete, poorly described, or do not answer research question. Results complete, but do not completely address the research question. Results complete and tied directly to the research question. Discussion: -Limitations -Clinical Implications -Impact 20No or minimal limitations, implications, recommendations presented. Limited apparent impact on the profession Adequate conclusions and descriptions of the clinical implications; does not fully address limitations, concrete suggestions for future study presented. Excellent summarization of the limitations and clinical impact is discussed and/or detailed suggestions for future study are offered. Presentation Style 15Does not face audience, poor eye contact, reads slides. Unable to address basic questions about the project. Occasional lapses with speech, pacing, or eye contact; has difficulty with more in-depth questions. Clear inflection and pronunciation, good eye contact, effective at handling more in-depth questions. Format: Style, Clarity, Grammar, and use of images, figures, and tables 10Difficult to read the font, spelling or grammar errors common. Ineffective use of images, figures, etc. Minimal spelling and grammar errors (2 or fewer), good use of images, figures, etc. Able to read most font, tables and graph axes on slides. No spelling or grammar errors. Excellent use of images, figures, etc. to illustrate or feature key points. Able to read font, tables and graph axes on slides. References 5No references. Minimal References, or not well selected. Key references are provided to support the project. TOTAL SCORE100 This table is too busy and the audience will not be able to read it

8. Discussion Summarize what the results mean and how they answered the study objective (s) Include a tie-in to the clinical impact of the findings Do not use red font with a black or blue background – difficult on the audience’s eyes

9. Discussion Address any new questions the study brought to light Incorporate limitations of the project

10. Conclusions Main findings of the project Give a take home message Offer suggestions for future study

11. Acknowledgements and/or References A general rule of thumb is allow an average of 1 minute per slide This takes into account an average of – quick slides, such as the title slide, – as well as longer slides (e.g method or result descriptions), which could take 2-3 minutes each.