Medical Care |

Medical Care




Adea abstract preparation

Oral presentations and E-Poster presentations

Selecting Your Program Streams
The Program Organising Committee (POC) accepts submissions of abstracts of original contributions on any topic
related to the following program streams:
1. Scientific 2. Program Evaluation/Review of Resource Delivery/Quality Improvement Activity 3. Clinical Practice/Case Studies/Service Delivery
Specific details and examples for each stream are outlined below. If you would like advice about preparing your
abstract, please contact the ADEA National Office. Please note the criteria listed (for each type of abstract
shown in the examples below) are used by the Reviewers to score the abstracts – call it a recipe if you like, but
without it, an abstract may score a low mark and not be eligible for presentation.
Abstracts must score 6/10 or higher to be accepted for presentation.

No correspondence will be entered into and the judges' decision is final.

Before writing your abstract you should ensure …
That you ask a colleague/mentor for help! Throughout your abstract preparation keep in touch with your mentor
to assist by discussing what data to include, how the data is best presented, how to introduce your work & how
to link your research to practice, etc. Proof-reading of both the drafts and the final version before submission is
strongly recommended.
It is recommended that if you are successful in being offered an oral or an e-poster presentation that you also
seek your mentor's assistance with preparing your talk/e-poster.

Before lodging your abstract, you should ensure .
a. the same font is used throughout, especially symbols. Times New Roman is the recommended font
b. the text is not longer than 300 words
c. any tables, images or figures are in a graphic format (preferably .jpg), are in greyscale (as they are not
printed in colour), and are in a resolution in order of 200dpi (which corresponds to the final print specifications)
d. your preference for which society should review your abstract (it should be ADEA if you are working from this
Oral presentation or e-poster presentation
During the submission process, you will be asked to select if you wish your abstract to be reviewed for an oral or an e-poster presentation. Please note that your selection is a guide only for the committee. The POC will allocate accepted abstracts to either an oral or an e-poster presentation. There are always more submissions for the oral part of the program than can be fitted in the available program slots, and so all presenters should be prepared to produce an e-poster if they are not accepted into the program as an oral presentation. The preferred means of presenting your oral presentation is by MS Powerpoint. Ideally you should bring your presentation to the meeting on a USB memory stick. Delegates will not be able to use their own laptops during the presentation. The Speaker preparation room will be continuously staffed during the conference so you can check your presentation beforehand. For those presenting an e-poster, you do not need to print a poster but instead send a Powerpoint file of your ‘poster presentation' prior to the conference. When setting up and making your Powerpoint file please ensure the minimum font is size 20pt, with no more than ten slides, and that the file size is less than 5 megabytes. 2015 ADEA Abstract submission preparation and guidelines : Oral and e-poster presentations
Your e-posters are going to be seen by delegates on dedicated computers set up in the exhibition area – and
after the conference will also be on the conference web page. We will .pdf the file so it cannot be amended by
Further details on preparing oral presentations and e-posters will be sent to accepted authors in due course by
the Conference Secretariat.

ADEA Awards
Each year awards are given to recognise good quality work. During the conference, work is judged using the
criteria outlined for preparing abstracts.
The ADEA awards include:
* Best Oral Presentation * Best Novice Oral Presentation * Best e-Poster Presentation * Best Novice e-Poster Presentation Please note: To be eligible for a Novice Presenter prize, you will be asked to nominate whether you are a novice presenter when submitting your abstract. The POC defines a ‘Novice' presenter as an ADEA member presenting for the first time at the ADS-ADEA Annual Scientific Meeting, therefore if you have previously presented at your branch conference, you are still eligible for this category. These awards will be presented to ADEA members as judged by a peer review committee appointed by the ADEA Program Organising Committee.

Program Streams
A scientific abstract must contain the following:
* An introduction or background to the study. The abstract should be written in the past tense as the study should be completed and the data analysed. * An aim or hypothesis. * Clearly defines the methodology (quantitative, qualitative) * How is the study conducted? * Who was studied? * Was there a control group or any other measures used to reduced bias? * How was the data collected? * Were the tools used validated in the study? How were they validated? * How was the data analysed? * The results of the study must relate to the hypothesis or aim. * A conclusion and recommendation that relates to the aim and is an outcome of the results.
Example of a quantitative paper:


T.L Dunning
Dept of Endocrinology and Diabetes, St. Vincent's Hospital and the University of Melbourne, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia
Research is a core component of the diabetes educator role across a spectrum of research activities that includes providing
evidence-based care, interpreting research findings for people with diabetes educators, and undertaking research. A one shot
cross-sectional survey of diabetes on the Australian Diabetes Educators Association membership list was undertaken in
2004. The aim was to determine diabetes educators' research beliefs, skills and knowledge, and explore the factors that
influence their participation in research activities. Self-administered questionnaires were used to collect the data. One hundred
and eighteen responded; 92% were female, most were aged between 41 and 50 years, and 90% had never authored or co-
authored a publication, yet 76% indicated diabetes education research was essential and could improve patient care and
diabetes outcomes. While 40% agreed clinicians could conduct research and 56% said research should be a core subject in the
diabetes education certificate courses, 52% believed research was "best left to the academics". Fifty percent believed they had
the knowledge and skills to conduct research but lacked the confidence to so do and identified barriers such as heavy workload,
lack of resources and access to research mentors as inhibiting factors. The findings indicate diabetes educators hold positive
beliefs about research but only a minority actively participate in research.
2015 ADEA Abstract submission preparation and guidelines: Oral and e-poster presentations

Example of a qualitative study:

B Rasmussen1, T. Dunning2, B. O'Connell3
1School of Nursing, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia
2Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes, St. Vincent's' Hospital and University of Melbourne, VIC, Australia
3School of Nursing, Cabrini Hospital and Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
This doctoral study aimed to gain an understanding of how young women with Type 1 diabetes managed turning points and
transitions in their lives. Researchers have identified transitional period as peak times for health-compromising and diabetes
mismanagement behaviours to occur, especially among women (1, 2). Little attention has been given to the factors that
influence everyday decision-making processes or understanding of the life course perspectives of the chronically ill people to
identify what is, or became, a turning point and transitions for them. Data was collected by using taped interviews and
systematically analysed using constant comparative analysis and coding system to identify emerging categories. The core
problem the women experienced as they reached turning points and transitions was identified as ‘being in the grip of blood
glucose levels'.
Three major categories were identified as having the most impact on the state of ‘being in the grip of
BGLs'. They were responses of other people to the individual women's' diabetes, the impact of being susceptible to
fluctuating BGLs and the impact of the individual women's' diabetes on other people's lives. Furthermore, the study
identified how the women overcame the core problem by engaging in three interconnected processes that occurred
simultaneously. They were ‘forming sustaining balance'. These processes, which each encompassed numerous strategies
were necessary enablers that helped women to managed turning points and transition in their lives and were fundamental to
lessening the ‘grip of BGLs'. The presentation will focus on the findings of the research and highlight some of the
recommendations to clinical practice when striving to improve health service delivery for young women with Type 1 diabetes.
(1) Williams, C, Mothers, Young people and Chronic Illness, Burlington, UK: Ashgate Publishing Company: 2002
(2) A National Needs Assessment of Children and Adolescents with Diabetes: Juvenile Diabetes Foundation Australia and the
Diabetes Research Foundation 1999


These abstracts must contain the following: * An introduction or background explanation of the evaluated activity. * An aim to indicate what was being measured * How the evaluation was undertaken (method)? * Who was evaluated (program, clients, service)? * What tools were used? Were they validated tools? How were they validated? * Results which must reflect the aim. * A conclusion or recommendation that is related to the aim and the results.
Example of an evaluative activity of a program/resource delivery/quality improvement:

R. Watchorn, T. Dunning, K. Ng, G. Ward, D. Isaac
Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes, St. Vincent's' Hospital, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia
Background: Diabetes Shared Care (DSC), a method of facilitating optimal diabetes management by working in partnership
with general practitioners (GPs) and patients, has been operating since late 2003. DSC discourages GPs and patients from
using the diabetes outpatient clinic for emergency and primary health care problems. Prior to DSC, attendance at each clinic
ranged between 60 -80 patients per week and they were reviewed on average every 3 months. The DSC scheme was
implemented to reduce these unsustainable demands. Three hundred and forty eight GPs presently refer to the diabetes
clinic. Of these, 83 (24%) and 125 patients participate in DSC.
Aims: To reduce the number of patients attending the diabetes out-patient clinic; encourage GPs to manage diabetes by
providing education and facilitating effective communication to maintain accepted diabetes management targets.
Method: In 2004, an audit of a random sample of patients managed through DSC was undertaken (n-=55), which represents
44% of DSC patients. Data were collected on patient enrolment (baseline) and then at 12 months (audits). Data collected
included the frequency of out-patient clinic visits; HbA1c, total cholesterol and blood pressure; and the number of GPs
attending education sessions
Results: The table shows baseline and audit data for the sample of 55 DSC patients who were audited.
Over the 12 months, average clinic attendance was reduced to 50 per week. Fifty GPs attended at least one education session. Range 6 – 31, mode 15. Conclusion: Diabetes Shared Care reduced the number of inappropriate attendances to the diabetes clinic. GPs are slowly understanding DSC and attending education sessions. The management targets measured were maintained or improved. 2015 ADEA Abstract submission preparation and guidelines: Oral and e-poster presentations


These abstracts must contain the following: * An introduction or background statement that put the issue in context. * A clear description of the issue following a logical time line. * Description of the relevant observations, preferably using subjective (but data is appropriate in some cases) and objective information. * Outcomes – how were the issues managed/resolved? * Recommendations or implications for diabetes education and care.

M. Robins, D. Roberts
Logan Beaudesert Diabetes Service, Logan Hospital, QLD, Australia
Introduction: A 36 year old man (TL) presented to the Diabetes Service in December 2002 with a recent history of lethargy, polyuria, polydipsia and blurred vision. His random BGL was 34.2mmol/L. His weight was 120kg with a BMI 38.3 and a reported weight gain of 20kg in the previous 12 months. However, arterial blood gases indicated the presence of acidosis (pH 7.23, pCO2 18, HCO3 7). He reported no episodes of vomiting, fever or abdominal cramping and was afebrile. Treatment: The patient was treated initially according to DKA management protocols including an insulin infusion and subsequent commencement onto a basal bolus insulin regimen prior to discharge. Further pathology identified the likelihood of type 2 diabetes; GAD and IA2 antibodies were negative and C-Peptide levels were normal. HbA1c was 12.5%. TL was discharge on 220 units insulin daily plus twice daily metformin. Follow up: Discharge planning strategies centred around intensive follow up by the diabetes team, with particular emphasis on hypoglycaemia prevention as beta cell function improved. Within 4 weeks of discharge, insulin therapy had been ceased and glimepiride 1mg was added to metformin dosage with good glycaemic control. Discussion: In individuals with Type 2 diabetes, hyperglycaemia and elevation in plasma free fatty acids can impair beta cell function, sometimes severely enough to permit the development of DKA. Conclusion: Clinicians need to be aware that although rare, DKA can still occur in people with Type 2 diabetes. Inturn the presence of DKA in a newly diagnosed person with Type 2 diabetes impacts significantly on their management and educational needs. Abstracts are submitted on-line. The first step is to record your personal details on your own ‘registration dashboard'. If you have already completed this for your registration (or another ASN event eg ADS-ADEA 2012), you will not have to repeat this, just login to your ‘dashboard' as a ‘returning delegate'. As you complete any section of the submission, you will receive a confirmation email. You can use your ‘dashboard' to access your abstract submission at any time, and can edit it, and observe its selection status. The presenting author must be the person submitting the abstract, which must be submitted from their own ‘dashboard'. You can cut and paste your abstract in several simple steps. The benefits of this system are many but include: i. Ensuring your submission is complete as you will receive an immediate email confirmation ii. Allowing you to preview your abstract and make modifications to your satisfaction. iii. Ensuring accurate indexing of all authors in the abstract book iv. Ensuring consistent presentation of all abstracts in the proceedings (overarching formatting is imposed). WHEN YOU'VE FINISHED THE SUBMISSION
As long as you haven't incorrectly entered your own email address, you will receive an immediate confirmation
of your submission.
Your confirmation email will have instructions on how to return to your abstract submission to edit the content.
This will remain open and possible until the program committee allocates your work to the program.
This information is available on the conference websit 2015 ADEA Abstract submission preparation and guidelines: Oral and e-poster presentations


A SHARED DECISION-MAKING™ PROGRAM this program content, including this booklet is copyright protected by health Dialog Services Corporation (HDSC), a related entity of Bupa health Dialog Pty Limited (Bupa Health Dialog), who is licensed to use the material in Australia. You may not copy, distribute, broadcast, transmit, perform or display this program or any part thereof, without permission from Bupa health Dialog. You may not modify the contents of this program without permission from Bupa health Dialog. You may not remove or deface any labels or notices affixed to the program package. © Bupa health Dialog Pty Limited 2012

4.4 Welche Krankheitsstadien gibt es? Stadium 1: Die Krankheit entwickelt sich aus einem normalen Leistungsniveau. Stadium 2: In der Folge nimmt die/der Betroffene leichte Störungen wahr. Die Merkfähigkeit und das Gedächtnis sind beeinträchtigt. Namen und Termine werden vergessen. Bei manchen Situationen fehlt die Erinnerung und öfters werden Dinge verlegt.