American College of Sports Medicine

Northland Chapter

Home

About NACSM

Membership

Meetings

meeting_registrants

Student Resources

Worksite Health Promotion

ACSM Links

Online Membership Form

Contact Us

Online Abstract Submission Deadline is March 1, 2012

Click Here to Submit an Abstract




Call for submission of research abstracts for poster presentationin the Spring Tutorial Meeting Student Research Poster Session  which will be a portion of the Spring 2012 NACSM Tutorial Meeting, Friday March 30, 2012, St. Chatherine University, St. Paul, MN. Deadline for online submission is 11:59 pm on March 1, 2012

*Please note, only current NACSM members may submit and present research.

  • Check Your Membership Status
  • Join Regional Chapter as Student Member

All abstracts submitted that have followed the rules listed are automatically considered for receipt of the NACSM Student Research Awards.  You may opt out of the evaluation prcedures and still present at the meeting, however you will not be eligible to receive an award. If wish to opt out of the evaluation procedure, send an email to Dr. Stephanie Otto after you have submitted. 

 

  1. Title should not exceed 15 words.  Refer to Medicine & Science in Sport and Exercise (MSSE) for a model.
  2. Use standard abbreviations as in MSSE.
  3. Do NOT abbreviate in the title.
  4. Use SI units of measure
  5. The abstract must not exceed 2000 charchers.  Do not use a font size smaller than 10 point.

 


Rules for Abstracts Submission and Poster Presentation (you will have to affirm that you have read and understood these rules at the time of electronically submitting your abstract).


1. Each person is permitted to submit and be first author on only one abstract. You may co-author as many other abstracts as desired.
2. The first named author must be present at the 2012 NACSM SPRING TUTORIAL MEETING to present the abstract.  Abstract/case presenters must pay appropriate registration fee for the 2012 NACSM SPRING TUTORIAL MEETING. Do not submit an abstract if your attendance at the meeting is questionable.
3. All listed authors must approve the submitted abstract.
4. The faculty sponsor accepts responsibility as a sponsor for the abstract, as described in Rules 5-10 below.
5. The faculty sponsor attests to the originality and merit of the work and agrees to assure that the student presenter(s) have had guidance in preparing the poster according to accepted professional standards
6. The abstract must not have been published as an abstract or as a full paper in a scientific, medical, or professional publication at the time of submission.
7. Human studies must comply with the ACSM statement regarding the use of human subjects and informed consent.
8. Abstract submissions are only being accepted electronically and must be submitted no later than 11:59 pm  on the due date (March 1)
9. In the event an unforeseen emergency prevents you from being able to present your submitted abstract, please make every effort to notify either Dr. Stephanie Otto, at sotto@gac.edu or the Northland ACSM Office at  office@northlandacsm.org
10. All abstracts submitted and posters presented will be evaluated using rubric approved by NACSM for the purpose of determining the winners of NACSM undergraduate or graduate Student Research Awards. First author may opt out of this process by notifying Dr. Otto by email of this desire to not be included in the judging. This should be done at the time of submission.


 



If you have questions or experience difficulties submitting online, please contant Dr. Stephanie Otto at sotto@gustavus.edu, who is coordinating the research section.

 



EVALUATION PROCEDURES FOR ABSTRACTS AND PAPERS

The following is a list of areas to address when preparing a paper and/or abstract.  Each abstract will be subject by review by an NACSM committee prior to the meeting and during the onsite poster presentation.  They will consider the following information.

  1. Does the title appropriately describe the study (i.e. Dependent and independent variables included? Are nouns used as keywords?)
  2. Significance: Is there a clear statement of the problem?
  3. Design: Are the methods, techniques, and/or analysis correct?
  4. Results: Does the summary include results, conclusions, and/or implications of the study?
  5. Review scores for each category range from 0-5 using the scale below:
    0 = unacceptable or completely lacking
    1 = borderline
    2 = fair
    3 = acceptable
    4 = good
    5 = excellent
  6. Students will receive comments from all reviewers.  Scores will be used in determining eligibility for NACSM Student Research Awards.