General guidelines for submission
Abstracts must be submitted electronically via the online system for abstract submission.
The abstract text should not exceed a 250-word limit (not including title, authors names and affiliation details). The abstract title should not exceed a 130-character limit (spaces included). Co-authors of an abstract must not exceed five (5) in total. All abstracts will be subjected to editorial and scientific review. Abstract submission deadline is 31 January 2024.
When preparing an abstract, please refer to the relevant article by Curzon & Cleaton-Jones entitled ‘Preparing abstracts for submission and successful acceptance’, published in Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2011; 12: 282-287.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Every author can submit only one (1) abstract as presenting author, but can participate in several abstracts as co-author.
Registration of at least the presenting author is a prerequisite for inclusion of an abstract in the Congress program. Deadline for authors’ registration: 29 March 2024.
Each presentation at the Congress requires an abstract briefly describing the work that will be presented. The abstract should provide details on the methods used, as well as the most important findings. There are two categories including three types of abstracts that can be submitted for review: Research articles (Original Research or Systematic Reviews) and Case Reports.
Types of abstracts
These should include the following sections with headings in bold/capitals, describing the research undertaken and the obtained outcomes.
- Original research
AIM: Usually one short simple sentence stating the objective of conducting the study. METHODS: This section must be clearly written and with sufficient detail for the work to be repeated by other scientists. The statistical methods used should be stated here. Where needed, the FDI tooth notation system must be used. RESULTS: These should be clearly and succinctly presented and only related to the methods described. Where needed, appropriate data should be given as to the reproducibility of the findings. Results of statistical analyses should also be included in this section. Images, tables and visual data cannot be submitted. CONCLUSION: This should briefly outline the most important findings.
- Systematic Reviews
AIM: This section should provide a brief introduction of the subject being investigated, including the context and purpose of the review. METHODS: This section must describe details of search strategy, inclusion/ exclusion criteria applied and methodology used for data collection, analysis and synthesis. If applicable, the text should also include a statement that the study protocol was registered with an online registry (e.g., PROSPERO). RESULTS: Findings of the review should be clearly and succinctly presented. Results of statistical analyses should also be included in this section. Images, tables and visual data cannot be submitted. CONCLUSION: This should briefly outline the most important conclusion(s) and their significance for clinical practice and future research.
These should include the following sections with headings in bold/capitals, describing the case(s) and treatment provided.
BACKGROUND: This section should briefly describe the background of the case report, introducing the topic that the case/technique addresses, as well as explain why this case is noteworthy. CASE(S) REPORT: This section should be the longest and most detailed of the abstract. Relevant information should include patient(s) basic demographics, medical history and clinical findings. TREATMENT: The treatment plan, techniques used and the final outcomes must be described in this section. FOLLOW-UP: This includes a description of the follow-up care carried out, which preferably should have been for two years where appropriate, to indicate the degree of success. CONCLUSION: Includes the main ‘take-home’ message from the report, indicating its significance and explaining the implications for clinical practice or future research.