How I got started

What interesting abstracts did for me

Most young scientists dream with a call for papers!

When you're doing your postdoc, often the first chance you get to get your name associated with your area and your work, is to present at a conference. I was very present in those things. I liked them, and often won prizes. 🏆

Look, it's me! My feet are in the Pacific! 😊

How? With a good abstract, how else?  

See here the citation for the one below.

Let's explore how I got to attend conferences with paid travel expenses (university funding), hotel money (invititation to speak at a special symposium by a learned society), and a well deserved holiday (money from a research recognition award). 💰

Step 1 - Intriguing title:

VEGF knockdown in muscle improves recovery of blood flow and arteriolargenesis after ischaemia

I'm telling people the opposite of what would be intuitive and expected. 😲

You know... to engage them!

Step 2: Be clear, and tell them what you're going to tell them

I highlighted the background and setting in blue. 

In purple are the research model and the hypothesis.

The concise methodology is in green. 

The bulk of the text is where the meat is -- the results in yellow. This is what makes or breaks your abstract. Remember, this is a learned audience, they want to learn new things.

The final sentence, in pink, is the take-home message.

Step 3: Back it up with your presentation

Show up. Take a poster. Make a presentation. Go to the sessions that interest you. Ask questions. Oh... and talk to people like they are people. Not colleagues or collaborators.

Comments

Post a Comment

Leave a comment!

London Book Fair 2024: challenges for publishers

Image
I went to London with a purpose. It’s always good to meet collaborators and friends, but I had other goals with my visit. You see, it’s never good when the decisions that impact us are arrived at without our input. I wanted to bring awareness of my new peer review standards project to those in the publishing industry that can benefit from them. I'm comfortable researching and reviewing, even editing and managing the peer review process, but hearing editors and publishers speak of the big picture issue was an eye-opener. Change is ever present The publishing industry fancies itself as having evolved to explore the heritage and lived experience of minorities, by more frequently placing a spotlight on hidden and undervalued communities. Jonathan Karp, who spoke on the current model of employee ownership that underpins his role as CEO at Simon & Schuster , perfectly exemplified this—with profits now being reinvested in the company, there’s a new collaborative
Read more

How to spot fake reviewers: a beginner's guide

Image
For those unfamiliar with or new to academic publishing, peer review manipulation is hard to spot. This is mainly because most peer review reports are still confidential documents that stay buried deep in academic journal's editorial offices. As long as this continues to be the default, recognising good and bad peer reviews is difficult enough... now we have to worry about fake peer review as well?! 😒 Well, yes. Yes, we do. The peer review process in academic publishing is unlike any other. The style and content of a manuscript are criticized, as are the thought processes that birthed it. Everything from word choice to significance of the research focus is under scrutiny. In traditional peer review formats, reviewers recommend that manuscripts be accepted or rejected. This much power may make some less scrupulous people guiddy... or yearning to rig the system. The refereeing work that is supposed to be one of the garantors of research integrity is itself highly susceptible to ma
Read more

London Book Fair 2024: OA and AI

Image
In a survey on the trends of academic publishing conducted in 2023, reflecting on the need to reformulate the current business model was front of mind. The need to optimize operational efficiencies may stem from the increased adoption of open access (OA) policies. For those not in the know, OA is a practice that enables research outputs to be distributed online, free of access charges or other barriers, including the ability for copy or reuse, by applying an open license for copyright. The mandates  advocated by the Holdren Memo in the US, the Nelson Memo in the UK, and Plan S for the EU consolidated the view that unrestricted access to research publications is part of an integral right for transparency—we want to view the outcomes of taxpayer-funded research. However, many publishers follow a gold OA model and charge an article processing charge (APC), which is typically paid through institutional or grant funding. This means that readers don't pay, because t
Read more