• Users Online: 375
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 

 Table of Contents  
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 128-129

Reply to “Letter to editor” written in response to “Perspectives on poster as a presentation mode in conferences”

1 Department of Physiology, MKCG Medical College, Ganjam, Odisha, India
2 Department of Physiology, Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Date of Web Publication13-Dec-2018

Correspondence Address:
Himel Mondal
Department of Physiology, MKCG Medical College, Ganjam - 760 004, Odisha
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jcrsm.jcrsm_18_18

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Mondal H, Mondal S. Reply to “Letter to editor” written in response to “Perspectives on poster as a presentation mode in conferences”. J Curr Res Sci Med 2018;4:128-9

How to cite this URL:
Mondal H, Mondal S. Reply to “Letter to editor” written in response to “Perspectives on poster as a presentation mode in conferences”. J Curr Res Sci Med [serial online] 2018 [cited 2022 Aug 11];4:128-9. Available from: https://www.jcrsmed.org/text.asp?2018/4/2/128/247488

Dear Sir,

We thank the author for her/his interest on the published article “Perspectives on poster as a presentation mode in conferences.”[1] The author pointed out some important aspects of poster presentation and provided suggestions for the conduct of a successful conference with poster as a presentation mode.

We agree with the author that there may be some difficulty from the part of organizers in ascertaining the validity and credibility of posters from “unstructured” abstract. However, many organizers now accept “structured” abstract at par with that of oral presentation. Hence, it may be possible to assess the credibility of the abstract as it is done for oral presentation.

Author opined that it may be difficult assessing the presenter regarding the scientific content in the poster. However, this difficulty may be faced with both oral and poster presentation.

Tandem session of poster presentation is really a problem for effective knowledge transfer. Hence, poster session may be conducted simultaneously with oral presentation in different halls considering its equal scientific content as oral presentation.

During evaluation of poster, the assessors may experience “visualization fatigue” as described by the author. In oral presentation, the audience may show fluctuation in attention.[2] Uniform evaluation capabilities of the assessor may also fluctuate more toward the end of the session. Hence, subjective evaluation method has limitation both for oral and poster presentation. These can be partially overcome by the use of objective evaluation methods by multiple assessors. Then, the average of scores may be taken for better acceptability of the evaluation.

The author pointed out a fact that many organizers do not store the poster in any repository. However, if this hinders the knowledge dissemination, authors themselves can contribute for storage of their poster in open access repository as described in the guidelines below.

Supporting the suggestions provided by the author, we would like to share some additional views. First, scrutiny of the abstract of the poster should be done with peer review and the review should be aimed to improve the scientific content of the article, not primarily aimed to reject the article.[3] Second, as the abstract has been peer reviewed; the flawed abstract is already filtered, so presenters may dress up their posters with visually appealing styles. Third, considering the popularity of electronic media, organizers may reinforce audiovisual component of the presentation along with suggested printed media by the author. Finally, many organizers may not be capable of maintaining a retrievable digital archive of the posters and content of the oral presentations due to shortage of funds. In that case, they can urge the authors to do that.

The thought-provoking letter of the author helped us to formulate a mini guide for a poster presentation. These are based on the suggestion by the author with additional inputs from us. This can be considered by the organizers and authors.

Steps for poster presentation in a conference [Figure 1]:
Figure 1: Steps for preparation of a poster with its digital archiving for presentation in a conference

Click here to view

  1. Write down a full paper as is done for an oral presentation or manuscript for publication
  2. Write down the abstract only after writing the full paper
  3. Upload or send it to organizer's website or postal address according to guidelines
  4. The abstract passes through rigorous peer review
  5. Revise the abstract according to comments of the reviewers, if requested
  6. Revised abstract get accepted for presentation
  7. Make a digital copy of the poster with the provision of editing. Review it multiple times for detection of any errors. Let all the authors review it for approval of final version
  8. Upload it to a free digital repository (e.g., Zenodo) which stores your content and provides a digital object identifier (DOI) number[4]
  9. Use DOI in poster and share it with organizers so that they can link your digital copy in their records


We would like to thank Dr. Arpita Priyadarshini, Professor and Head of the Department, Department of Physiology, Govt. Medical College, Balangir, for providing us an insight of conference from an organizer's perspective.

Financial support and sponsorship


Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

  References Top

Mondal H, Mondal S. Perspectives on poster as a presentation mode in conferences. J Curr Res Sci Med 2017;3:102-6.  Back to cited text no. 1
  [Full text]  
Heard S. For your next conference: Poster or talk? San Antonio, USA: UT Health Graduate School of Biomedical Science. Available from: http://www.gsbs.uthscsa.edu/blog/for-your-next-conference-poster-or-talk. [Last accessed on 2018 May 15].  Back to cited text no. 2
Quality and Value: The True Purpose of Peer Review. Nature; 2006. Available from: https://www.nature.com/nature/peerreview/debate/nature05032.html. [Last accessed on 2018 May 15].  Back to cited text no. 3
Zenodo. Switzerland: CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research. Available from: https://www.zenodo.org/. [Last accessed on 2018 May 15].  Back to cited text no. 4


  [Figure 1]


Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

  In this article
Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded161    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal