If you have questions or comments please use the form on the contact page or add the hashtag #GPCAP on Twitter. We will collate questions here (minor editing likely...!)
Authorship
|
ISMPP U: Could you please clarify if per the guidance it is acceptable that abstract authors approve the abstract without reviewing (eg ‘I don't have any comment and I approve the content’)?
|
As per the recommendations, it is often unrealistic for authors to provide critical review to a short piece of work and they may also have discussions that cannot be resolved within the limited timelines. An approval of the abstract would suffice, although all efforts should be made to seek review from all authors at all stages of abstract development.
|
|
ISMPP U: For original presentations: how do the presenters feel about corporate authors who were on the abstract but then left the company at the time of the presentation preparation. Should they still be listed as authors?
|
If the author contributed significantly enough to warrant authorship on the abstract then they should remain as an author on the poster or oral presentation.
They will of course be required to review and approve the poster or oral presentation as it is developed and so should have a confidential disclosure agreement (CDA) in place as they have left the company. If a CDA cannot be put in place or they are otherwise unable to contribute to the development then they should be acknowledged appropriately citing “Dr X was employed by [the company] during the study and abstract development but was unable to participate in development of the poster/oral presentation” or similar. In short, unless there are good reasons to change, authorship should remain consistent between abstract and presentation. If authorship needs to change then it should be acknowledged. Note the author in question should be notified of the change and consent to be named in the presentation obtained, although as they agreed to be an author, consent may not be required. |
Authorship/Encores
|
ISMPP U: How would you deal with authors who contributed to the abstract but were not then involved in poster development, and how would you deal with an encore poster if an original author doesn't approve the draft?
|
Abstract authors who did not contribute should be acknowledged on the poster (and removed from the author list), with a disclosure, eg A Bee worked on the abstract but was unable to contribute to this poster. (See 3.1.3 in article.)
Having authors agree to work on any related posters or orals at the time of signing up to work on the abstract can reduce the risk of non-involvement at the poster stage. In terms of an encore, if the author does not approve the final version of an encore then we suggest they should be removed (even if they approved the original) to the Acknowledgements, as they haven’t agreed to this particular version of the poster. |
|
ISMPP U: For encore presentations: how do the presenters feel about corporate authors who have left the company that have done the work. Can they be dropped off the author list for the encore?
|
If a corporate author was involved in the original research, then that author should stay on any encores, but needs to give permission (can be done prospectively), and really also needs to see and sign off on each encore; however, any confidentiality disclosure agreement (CDA) may override this contact with previous company and data. If a corporate author cannot complete the requirements for authorship, then we recommend removing that name from the byline and adding an acknowledgment of previous involvement. This is easy to do for a poster, but for an abstract it assumes that the conference understands about maintaining the integrity of the authorship group, and that there is some mechanism to allow some acknowledgement in relation to the abstract, which currently rare. The practical solution then is just to note the (ex-) author’s involvement on the poster or oral.
|
|
ISMPP U: Should authors on an encore abstract always be the same as on the original?
|
Ideally the authors should be the same; however, if all original authors agree, a local presenter can be added to ensure presentation on site; provided that the congress permits or has a policy on this. Fig 2 in article is useful for this. Alternatively, authors can be removed if they do not wish to participate in the encore.
|
Encores
|
Twitter: What is your opinion on encore of abstract after same data have been published in manuscript form at a journal?
|
That would be a redundant presentation I think... No longer necessary to present at conferences unless it was a really niche meeting... maybe have the full publication on hand to distribute or linked to the poster? (© permitting)
|
Posters
|
ISMPP U: Should a contributor agree in writing to be cited on the poster?
|
Yes: as stated in the recommendations and as recommended by the ICMJE and GPP3, consent to be acknowledged should be sought by anyone appearing in a publication by name. (See 3.1.6 in article.)
|
Citations
|
ISMPP U: Is it acceptable to cite poster having a QR code (is it considered as publicly available)?
|
Our recommendation not to cite posters is based on the fact that they are not peer reviewed, regardless of their availability. Additionally, QR codes do not necessarily make posters publicly available as access may be restricted. Another consideration is that hosting sites may be available only for the duration of the congress (or close shortly after). Sites hosted by a pharma company or agency may also have a limited time of availability, so for these reasons, we would try to avoid citing posters where at all possible.
|
|
ISMPP U: As poster/slides might be cited, do you have some recommendation about poster/slide disclaimers?
|
The first action would be to double-check that data being cited is not actually in the (citable, reviewed) abstract. If it is not, then the reference to the poster/presentation needs to be clear that it is the poster being referenced, eg 'Poster presented at ABC Conference, London, UK: 23 October 2019’. Additionally, consider going back to authors who want to use this citation and reiterate that material is not peer-reviewed. Also it is worth checking that the full article has not come out and superseded the conference presentation.
If the question is about adding a disclaimer to the slides/poster, noting that they have not been peer-reviewed and data may not be final, then that would be a good example of transparency: it is not something we have ever seen though, and is unlikely to appeal to conferences. |
|
ISMPP U: Some congresses are reviewed by members of a committee and selected for acceptance. Couldn't this be considered peer-review?
|
Yes, most conferences have a review committee that will look through the incoming abstracts to ensure they are relevant and pertinent to the conference, and that counts as the review procedure, but clearly it cannot be rigorous peer review as per an article, as there is no feedback to the authors on areas for improvement, just an acceptance or not. Accepted abstracts also do have a citation and can be tracked back to a publication.
|
Copyright
|
ISMPP U: If we consider that the aim of encores is to communicate to a wider medical audience, do you think congress organisers are really that bothered about (possible breaches of) copyright?
|
We cannot really speculate on whether congress organizers are bothered about copyright infringement or not. However, regardless of attitudes to copyright infringement, it is still illegal to reuse a copyrighted item without permission. Even if some conferences do not appear to be overly concerned or indeed be aware of copyright considerations, we need to ensure that materials are legal, and seek copyright permission if required.
|
|
ISMPP U: Can you just clarify what should be done if a figure was included in a past poster but not abstract, and now we have a manuscript in which we want the figure to be included...
|
For a figure first appearing in an abstract, the copyright is likely to lie with the society/journal in which the abstracts were published (if published) and so copyright permission will need to be sought: the first thing to do is to check the copyright that was transferred at abstract submission, and whether that copyright lies with the society or the journal.
For a figure appearing just in a poster that is now needed for a full article, unless the copyright in the poster has been specifically transferred to the congress, the copyright lies with the creators, so in this case that would be the authors. Conferences may claim copyright of posters and slide presentations but may not actually have it unless the authors have actively granted it. So, the small print needs to be checked on submission and on any subsequent actions (eg if uploading an e-poster to a conference website – does that upload constitute a transfer of copyright?) |
|
ISMPP U: Is it possible to ask for copyright clearance to reuse an abstract from the first congress for meetings the following year (rather than for a specific meeting)?
|
Obtaining blanket copyright in advance will depend entirely on the copyright holder. As permission fees are a revenue stream for many publishers and societies it is unlikely that a copyright holder would provide a blanket clearance, even if it is time-limited and restricted just to conferences or full publications (eg, reuse of figures).
|
Other
|
ISMPP U: Should the publication manager be named in an acknowledgement?
|
Publication managers would not typically be named, but this will very much be a company decision. Their involvement should be reviewed on a case by case basis and if their input has significantly helped shape the drafts then there may be a case for acknowledgment, although of course not authorship.
|
|
ISMPP U: Do you plan on including guidance related to travel for presenters?
|
We do not plan on providing guidance as the key considerations will vary across pharma companies, subject areas, and conferences’ expectations, so we consider this to be outside the scope of our recommendations.
|
|
ISMPP U: Can you please repeat your recommendation for what to do when a congress presentation will have been published as a manuscript by the time of the presentation?
|
If an article is accepted that contains data from your accepted, but not yet presented, abstract, then:
Top tip: when submitting the full article, consider noting in the cover letter that an associated abstract is under consideration for XX conference – publishers are not averse to publicity for an article, especially in an environment full of their desired readers, so timing an article for a conference is a good move. |
|
ISMPP U: I'm sad to learn societies are not responding. Might you consider reaching the new scientists and clinicians, working with graduate schools and medical schools?
|
Thank you for this suggestion, as we would be happy to reach out to anyone who we feel will find our recommendations helpful.
|