Abstract Submission

Conference Profile

Before submitting an abstract, authors must create a conference profile. More than one abstract can be submitted through the conference profile. After an abstract has been created, modifications can be made until the submission deadline.

Choosing a Track Category
During the submission process, you will be asked to select one track category for your abstract. The track category is the general heading under which the abstract will be reviewed and later published in the conference materials, if accepted. The track category which best describes the subject of the abstract should be chosen.

Abstract Structure
Titles should be brief and clearly indicate the nature of the presentation. A maximum of five keywords can be supplied per abstract. Abstracts in all tracks should be structured as follows:

Option 1
Suited for research conducted in all disciplines. Abstracts submitted under the first option should contain concise statements of:
Background: indicate the purpose and objective of the research, the hypothesis that was tested or a description of the problem being analysed or evaluated

• Methods: describe the study period / setting / 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 / outcome of the study. Please summarize any specific results.
• Conclusions: explain the significance of your findings / outcomes of the study for HIV prevention, treatment, care and / or support, and future implications of the results.

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

1. Is there a clear background and justified objective?
2. Is the methodology/study design appropriate for the objectives?
3. Are the results important and clearly presented?
4. Are the conclusions supported by the results?
5. Is the study original, and does it contribute to the field?

Option 2
Suited for lessons learned through programme, project or policy implementation or management. Abstracts submitted under the second option should contain concise statements of:

• Background: summarize the purpose, scope and objectives, of the programme, project or policy.
• Description: describe the programme, project or policy period / setting / location, the structure, key population (if applicable), activities 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 / 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 your findings / outcomes of the programme, project or policy for HIV prevention, treatment, care and / or support, and future implications of the results.

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

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

Font
A standard font, e.g. Times New Roman or Arial, should be used when formatting the text. This helps to prevent special characters from getting lost when copying the text to the online abstract submission form. Ensure to check the final abstract with the preview function before submission, and edit or replace as necessary.

Authors and Word Limits
The abstract text body is limited to 250 words. Titles are limited to 25 words and a maximum of 10 authors allowed per abstract. Information about authors, institutions and study groups will not count toward the word limit. The use of tables and graphs are strongly discouraged.

Typical reasons for Abstract Rejection:

• Abstract poorly written
• Not enough new information
• Clear objective and/or hypothesis missing
• Methods (either quantitative or qualitative) inadequate and/or insufficient to support conclusions
• Summary of essential results inadequate and/or missing
• Study conclusions are not supported by the data
• Linkage between different parts of the abstract not comprehensible
• Duplicate or overlap with another abstract
• Study too preliminary or insufficient to draw conclusions
• Study lack of originality

Recommendations

• Abstracts should disclose primary findings and should avoid promissory statements such as “experiments are in progress” or “results will be discussed”.
• We recommend a series of review, even by colleagues prior to submission. Accepted abstracts will be published “as it is”. It is the authors’ responsibility to submit a correct abstract; any error in spelling, grammar, or scientific fact will be published as typed by the author if accepted.

Submission Confirmation
After submission of the abstract, a confirmation email will be sent to the abstract submitter. If you do not get this, kindly check your Spam/Junk mails first before contacting us.