(Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 1998;18:673-676.)
© 1998 American Heart Association, Inc.
The Working Group Report on Science-Based Categories for Abstracts
Submitted to the Annual Scientific Sessions
Robert O. Bonow;
George A. Mensah;
Michael A. Bettmann;
Gary H. Gibbons;
Augustus O. Grant;
Jose Jalife;
Rose M. Robertson;
; for The Committee on Scientific Sessions Program (CSSP), American Heart Association
 |
Introduction
|
|---|
 Top
 Introduction
|
|---|
A primary mission of the Scientific Sessions
of the American Heart Association (AHA) is to attract the best new and
emerging science from a wide spectrum of established and new
investigators worldwide. The AHA also seeks to promote the missions of
its scientific councils (Table 1
) by
fostering interaction and collaboration between new and old members as
well as non-members participating in the scientific sessions. In order
to facilitate submission of abstracts for presentation at
the scientific sessions and to enable a fair review and grading of
submitted abstracts, the Committee on Scientific Sessions Program
(CSSP) and the Council Affairs Committee (CAC) formed the subcommittee
on Science-Based Abstract Review and charged it with the responsibility
of reviewing the abstract grading process. Membership of the
subcommittee included previous CSSP Program Chairs and
representatives from the CSSP and CAC. On its
recommendation, a working group of the CSSP was formed and directed to
make specific recommendations for the revised abstract category list.
This report reflects the revisions made by the Working Group on
Science-Based Abstract Categories as approved by the CSSP on January
15, 1998.
A total of 85 unique categories were created within the three
broad bases of (a) basic research, (b) clinical science and (c)
population science (Tables 2 and 3). Reviewers for each category are
selected from a broad base of national and international expert members
of AHA scientific councils. Non-members of scientific councils with
national and international recognition for their expertise in relevant
categories may also be included in the panel of abstract reviewers.
Table 4 shows the list of scientific councils
and the categories for which they provide sponsorship and reviewers.
Each abstract is graded by 7–10 reviewers to provide a
fair and comprehensive review. The abstract category list will be
revised yearly by the CSSP in order to reflect the changing field of
science and to continue to capture the best new and emerging data from
the frontiers of basic research, clinical science and population-based
science.
