|We are now accepting abstract submissions for the ERS International Congress 2018. Submit an abstract.|
For questions regarding abstract subsmission and abstract sessions, please contact: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Call for abstracts
From December 2017, abstracts may be submitted online for the ERS International Congress 2018. The abstract submission deadline is 15 February, 2018.
Paper submissions will not be accepted.
The Congress Programme Committee will allocate successful abstracts to session formats, including:
- Oral Presentations
- Poster Discussions
- Thematic Poster sessions
Abstract authors will be notified of the status of their abstract by May 2018; session formats and scheduling of presentations will be communicated by the end of June 2018.
Accepted and presented during the ERS Congress abstracts will be published in a supplement of the online version of the European Respiratory Journal known as the Abstract Book. Publication in the Abstract Book or Congress Guide requires registration by at least one author.
Correspondence and further information regarding abstract travel grants and sponsorship will be sent to the corresponding author only. If you intend to apply for ERS sponsorship once abstracts have been accepted, please ensure that you are the corresponding author of the abstract.
Once you have saved your abstract, you can later edit or update it until you feel it is ready for submission.
All abstracts must be submitted by the deadline of 15 February, 2018 via myERS.
From May 2018, late-breaking abstracts may be submitted online for the ERS International Congress 2018. The abstract submission deadline will be 31 May, 2018.
Late-breaking abstracts must contain novel data that has not been presented elsewhere. Additional information (including submission fees) will be available on the ERS Congress website in due course.
Frequently asked questions on abstracts
What is an abstract?
What is a late-breaking abstract?
The study and results reported should be novel and not simply an extension of previously published work. The late-breaking abstract round is not designed to favour investigators who unintentionally missed the deadline for the regular abstract submission.
My project is still ongoing and there are no results yet, should I still submit an abstract?
After your abstract is accepted you cannot update the content of your abstract for the official publication as the accepted version will be published, however you are permitted to present updated information onsite at the Congress.
Can I submit an abstract that has already been presented at different event?
Can I submit a case report study?
Do I need to disclose information of conflict of interest in my abstract?
Where can I find the guidelines on how to prepare an abstract?
You can access the instructions from this page or from the submission platform.
What is the required structure for an abstract?
Authors: The list of authors should be restricted to those individuals who carried out the study, conceived it, designed it, gathered the data, analysed the numbers and wrote the abstract. The author who will present the abstract should be listed first. Every listed author should read and approve the abstract before it is submitted.
Main text: A good abstract should address the five following questions in the relevant sections:
1. "Why did you start?" – Introduction or background / You should summarise, preferably in one sentence, the current knowledge specifically in relation to the work you are presenting.
2. "What did you try to do?" – Aims and objectives / State the aim of your study, and ideally include a short statement of the study's hypothesis. A legitimate scientific study is not done "to prove that something is true" but rather "to find out whether it is true." The distinction may seem small but it makes a significant difference. A formal hypothesis shows that you are objective.
3. "What did you do?" – Methods / In an abstract, the description of the methods has to be concise, and much of the details of what was done must be omitted. However, in a few short sentences, you can give the reader a good idea of the design of the study, the context in which it was done, and the types of patients or measurements that were included.
4. "What did you find?" – Results / It is important to give the main results of the study, not in subjective terms ("We found device X to be superior to device Y") but also in the form of some real data. You will need to choose which findings to report here: it should be the most important data in your study, and the findings on which your conclusions will be based. Do not include a table or figure unless you need it to show your results.
5. "What does it mean?" – Conclusions / Here, space constraints generally limit you to a single sentence of why you think your findings are important, and their potential implications. Keep your conclusions reasonable and supportable by the findings of your study. Remember that if your study was restricted to certain patients, or a particular therapy, or a specific device, its results may not extend beyond these restrictions.
Please see the full guidelines for more information