Online abstract mentoring:Experiences from the

International AIDS Conferences

byGurmit Singh

Professional Development & Education

Why?

What’s an Abstract – an example

Gurmit Singh - Abstract #1 – Accepted for AIDS IMPACT 2009 CONFERENCE, Oral Presentation in session: SocioPolitical challenge. Title:The added value of community involvement in public health/HIV research: An abstract review of the concept Aim:Despite the fact that experience shows community involvement to be an essential part of the response to combat the HIV epidemic, the added value of community involvement in public health and HIV research outcomes is still a matter for debate. Before assessing its’ added value, however, I first wanted to analyse how community involvement in HIV research is currently conceptualised, particularly in the post-ART context. A better understanding of this concept will thus identify the salient questions for future research. MethodsOn 27 March ‘09, I conducted an abstract search on PubMed Central for published peer-review journal articles after 1996 using the keywords ‘community research’ and ‘HIV’ simultaneously. The 67 studies thereby identified were then reviewed and categorised to understand how community involvement in research was conceptualised in these studies.  Results4 broad categories emerged. 54 studies fitted into category 1, where no definition of community involvement in research was provided. Of the remaining 13 studies, 4 fit into category 2, which referred only to passive involvement of the community, as in the community was only a subject in a predesigned research plan. The other 9 studies conceptualised community involvement as forms of participatory action research. 6 were grouped in category 3, where participants played an active role in designing the research with academics prior to the intervention. 2 cases fit into category 4, where community involvement was taken a step further in that participants also provided insight and/or recommendations to guide the research. 1 study overlapped both categories 3 and 4, but did not define one as being more valuable than the other. Of the 9 studies in categories 3 and 4, the added value of community involvement was found to be the empowerment of the community’s capacity, as well as an increased effectiveness of the research. No study presented any evidence of an improvement in outcomes for the science of public health, or in HIV prevention outcomes, as a result of the involvement of the community as partners in the design, implementation or translation of research. Discussion:While this concept review shows that there are perceived benefits of involving community in health and HIV research, the added-value to public health outcomes are poorly addressed. This review also suggests that community involvement in public health and HIV research has not yet led to any better or specific improvement in scientific knowledge as a tangible outcome. Hence, the concept needs to be clarified.(425 words)

Outline

Background

Programme Development

Programme Implementation

Results & Lessons Learned

Discussion

Background

Global HIV epidemic is now in its third decade

Medical, social-behavioral, and policy developments worldwide need to be shared

Historically, international dialogue on infectious diseases has been dominated by developed-country researchers

Context

International AIDS Conference:Largest international meeting devoted to a single health

issue25,000 participants attended AIDS 2008 in Mexico

Pathogenesis, Treatment & Prevention Conference:Smaller conference, with emphasis on science and

research 5,000 participants expected to attend IAS 2009 in July,

South Africa

ACCESS, EQUITY & PARTICIPATION

Doing science for conferences

Why do scientific abstracts get rejected?

Poor scientific contentWrong category or track selectionPoor construction/organizationData is too preliminaryLack of novelty, or not contributing to the field

Many submitters are from non-scientific background and not trained in scientific writing and publication processes

Programme Development

IAS serves as the secretariat for the AIDS & IAS Conferences

Idea: To create an online Abstract Mentoring Programme

Aim: to help less-experienced abstract-submitters around the world prepare abstracts of their work

Target: researchers working in HIV/AIDS programmes with scientific literacy ‘lack’ (research design, data presentation, how to discuss results)

Programme implementation

How were draft abstracts solicited? Pushmail sent out to all 13,000 IAS members, and past

conference delegates Website promotion Workshops at regional conferences

How were mentors recruited? IAS Governing Council members Previous conference mentors Previous conference abstract scholars Either existing HIV science experts, or those who had had

abstracts accepted before

E-learning Pedagogical Strategy

Build it,Market it,

And teach people how to Use IT

Before you submit

Via the conference website

To submitSelf-

help tools

SPACEA free service that engages

RESOURCES

Track and category

Title

Abstract text

ACTIVITY

SCAFFOLDING LEARNING

Resources: Online self-help tools

Abstract writing toolkit in 4 languages

Abstract FAQs

Abstract scoring guidelines

Examples of prize-winning abstracts from AIDS 2008

Top 5 reasons why abstracts are rejected

Link to AuthorAid resource library on scientific writing

Feedback/Assessment

Track and Title

1. Is the track chosen appropriate? Yes2. Does the title reflect the content of the abstract? Yes though on the topic sessions “health” they did not say what is included. Structure1. Does the abstract follow scientific and formal criteria? Yes2. Do the ideas cohere together? Yes3. Does each section provide relevant information? Yes though nothing has been mentioned what they do rather than skills sessions are which are held two -three days in a month.

SCIENTIFIC DESIGN:

Background1. Are the objectives clear and well-presented? Yes2. Is the research design sound? Yes

Materials/methods

1. Is the methodology used appropriate for the study? Yes but they should also involve caregivers and guardians who look after the infected and affected children.2. Is it easy to understand what methods the authors have used and why? Yes they are involving the infected & affected.3. Is the data analysis and interpretation appropriate? Not sure according with current data in India of affected children.

Results/Conclusions

1. Are the conclusions clearly explained and appropriate to the study? Yes though short( i know because of limited words).2. Is the study innovative? Does it provide new insights? Yes, more will be encouraged to attend these sessions if they see other children have increased their self esteems.3. Are the results analyzed in a broader context? Yes4. Are the future implications of this study discussed? No

INNOVATION:THE WEBSITE AS AN INTERACTIVESELF-ACCESSLEARNING SPACE

Results from AIDS 2008

Number of mentors 42 signed up; 26 received an abstract out of which 18 reviewed at least one abstract

Number of abstract authors 66 (some sent several abstracts for mentoring)

Number of abstracts received for mentoring

80

Number of abstracts reviewed by mentors

78

Number of abstracts submitted for the conference programme

59

Number of reviewed/mentored abstracts finally accepted

47 (30 Poster Exhibition, 13 CD-ROM, 2 Oral Abstract sessions, 1 Poster Discussion and 1 poster back up).

Note: 6 authors had more than 1 abstract accepted.

80% success rate

Results from IAS 2009

Number of mentors 63

Number of abstract authors 95

Number of abstracts received for mentoring

118

Number of abstracts reviewed by mentors

118

Number of abstracts submitted for the conference programme

84

Number of reviewed/mentored abstracts finally accepted

46

55% success rate

Results: Year-on-year

More mentors recruited

More abstracts mentored

More mentored abstracts submitted, but…

Less mentored abstracts accepted(note that the 2 conferences are different, so one should not simply compare

year-on-year)

Research question:

Does online mentoring improve the representation of science from

developing countries at

International AIDS conferences?

Let’s examine the monitoring data

For this year. From LMIC (World Bank)

Thus, online mentoring: motivates more submission leads to more acceptance inducts newcomers into literacy practices is engaging for learners builds networks around conferences (peer-peer & experts)

Submitted abstracts 40%

Accepted abstracts 30%

Mentored abstracts submitted 66%

Mentored abstracts accepted 60%

Main strengths (2)

Feedback from online survey done with mentors (n=6, AIDS 2008 ) & (n=31, IAS 2009):

Mentors indicated that this was a positive experience and they would be willing to serve as mentors again

For IAS 2009 83% of surveyed mentors reported they would be interested in becoming a dedicated mentor helping young HIV/AIDS researchers from low-income countries publish their research in scientific journal

Seeding community for collaboration

Futurizing learning

Cultivating ecologies

Some reflections….

Abstract submitters were appreciative of the feedback they received and wrote to IAS to thank them for the support provided

Mentors would be willing to provide online mentoring, but face obstacles (time and work commitment)

Results suggest that diverse types of organizations and adult learners may benefit from assistance in preparing research and program findings for conference submissions

Discussion

Should we expand the scope of abstract mentoring?

mentoring from experiment design to publication

Larger manuscript mentoring programme?

IAS is partnering with AuthorAid

Collaborative authoring through new technologies?

Potential for use of WikiEducator platform

Global eLearning:

From 1-way Knowledge transfer to a web of knowledge production

Wiki to learn & share globally

Thank you!The AMP Project Team

www.ias2009.org/mentor

www.iasociety.org/abstractmentor.aspx

http://www.wikieducator.org/MENTORING/online