Poster Judging Criteria

All posters in the Missouri ACP competition have a specific set of criteria for which the judges will base their scores on. The criteria for each category is listed below.

Clinical Vignette Criteria (Student and Resident)

Scoring of abstract based on five criteria:

Significance: The vignette should be interesting, unique and important. It will increase understanding of a disease process or improve the diagnosis or treatment of a disease.
Relevance and teaching value: The vignette should lead to improvement in clinical practice or provide a basis for further research. It should provide a “pearl” for diagnosis, physical examination, or management.
Clarity of poster: Written presentation is concise, well-written, organized with focused learning objectives. Ideas should be presented in a logical manner, and the text is free of grammatical or spelling errors.
Visual impact: The poster should have a pleasing, effective visual impact. Graphics should provide additional value in adding clarity and understanding to the vignette presentation.
Oral presentation: The presenter shall provide all relevant information in a concise, well-spoken fashion in no longer than 5 minutes. The presenter is conversant and knowledgeable with the presented vignette.

Grading is on a 10 point scale:
1-2 - poor, minimally meets criteria
5-7 - satisfactory meets some criteria but clearly not a candidate for winning
9-10 – excellent score, clearly a candidate to win

Research (Student and Resident)

Scoring of abstract based on five criteria:

Originality: The research concept is clearly stated, embedded in scientific literature, and either queries a new concept or an alternate approach to an old problem.
Methods: The research design should be suitable for the stated objectives. Subjects, materials and methods, and statistical approach should be appropriate and clearly described.
Significance: The results and conclusion should clearly reflect and answer the research question. The research should either lead to a better understanding of a disease process, or in improving the diagnosis or treatment of a disease.
Visual impact: The poster should have a pleasing, effective visual impact. Tables, figures, and graphs give a clear presentation of the results. Text should be clearly written and free of grammatical errors.
Oral presentation and Interview: The presenter shall provide all relevant information in a concise, well-spoken fashion in no longer than 5 minutes. The presenter should be knowledgeable and conversant with the research presented in the poster.

Patient Safety and Quality Improvement/High Value Care (Resident Only)

Scoring of abstract based on five criteria:

Significance: Does the intervention address a problem that is relevant to practice, either due to the frequency it is encountered or due to its severity in scope?
Methods: There is evidence of a systematic analysis of error (root cause analysis, etc), a systematic approach to improvement, or recognition of an intervention that has limited benefits or increased burdens.
Value and sustainability: The presentation should have an intervention or analysis with an emphasis on cost-conscious, high value care. It should show evidence that it endures at the home institution and should be applicable to other health care institutions.
Visual impact: The poster should have a pleasing, effective visual impact. Tables, figures, and graphs give a clear presentation of the results. Text should be clearly written and free of grammatical errors.
Oral presentation and Interview: The presenter shall provide all relevant information in a concise, well-spoken fashion in no longer than 5 minutes. The presenter should be knowledgeable and conversant with the information presented in the poster.

Grading is on a 10 point scale:
1-2 - poor, minimally meets criteria,
5-7 - satisfactory meets some criteria but clearly not a candidate for winning
9-10 – excellent score, clearly a candidate to win