Selection Criteria

Our call for abstracts is closed! Thank you to everyone who submitted an abstract – we received more than ever before!

In case you would like to know more about our abstract process, we’ll leave its original information below.


Abstracts will be anonymized and scored by an Abstract Review Committee consisting of clinical and non-clinical experts from across the province. Please proofread your abstract for spelling and grammatical errors and avoid the use of jargon or acronyms that may not be commonly recognized.

When you submit your abstract, you’ll be asked to identify whether the work you are submitting is in the “outcome” or “idea” phase. Each abstract will be assigned a score out of 50 based on the following criteria:

 

Outcomes

“Outcomes” are meant to describe an initiative that is underway or complete with demonstrated results and lessons that can be shared with Forum participants. The initiative does not have to be considered a success – failures provide valuable learning opportunities, too!

CONTEXT & RELEVANCE (15): The context in which the work was undertaken (what unit/department/community) is clearly defined and the aim(s) of the work is outlined. The proposed presentation has broad appeal in terms of educational merit, and is likely of significant interest to Quality Forum participants. The problem or opportunity is clearly stated, including a description of how it was identified.

INTERVENTION (15): The activities undertaken to respond to the problem or opportunity are described, including how changes were tested and implemented, and who was involved.

MEASUREMENT (10): The measurement/evaluation strategy is described, including attributable results to date.

LESSONS LEARNED (10): Any challenges faced and how they were addressed are shared, along with lessons learned and plans for sustainability.

 

Ideas

“Ideas” are meant to describe original thinking, promising practices or emerging ways of how to improve care that are too young to have results. The Forum is meant to be an opportunity to seek input, inspire collaboration, and spark action at an early stage.

CONTEXT & RELEVANCE (15): The context in which the work was undertaken or the idea came to be is clearly stated (what unit/department/community) and the problem or opportunity it seeks to address is identified. The proposed presentation has broad appeal in terms of educational merit and is likely of significant interest to Quality Forum participants.

INTERVENTION (10): The new work practice, way of engaging people or idea on how to improve care is clearly described, along with any assumptions made and challenges or lessons learned to date.

POTENTIAL/ACTUAL IMPACT (10): The extent to which what is being described may potentially impact or has already impacted quality or experience of care for patients and/or care providers.

ORIGINALITY (15): The extent to which what is being described is highly innovative, new or different to what is known to have been previously tried in practice or presented at a past Quality Forum.

Ready to submit your abstract? Don’t forget to view the guidelines first.