Review and selection of oral and poster papers
All papers will be peer-reviewed by two external reviewers who will score on a scale of 0 to 10 points based on the following criteria according to the type of paper. Discrepancies will be reviewed by the scientific committee who will resolve them. The highest scoring papers will be selected for oral presentation and the rest will be presented in poster format. In the case of clinical cases, description of clinical services and research protocols, the number of abstracts selected for oral presentation at the congress will be 5, 4 and 5 respectively. The remaining papers will be presented as posters at the congress and included in the book of abstracts, but will not be defended orally at the congress.
The criteria for assessing each type of work:
1. Original research work.
Criteria for research papers and reviews:
Achievable and clearly formulated objectives (0-1)
Design and methodology appropriate to the objectives and well described (0-2)
Clear presentation of the results (0-2)
Conclusions / Recommendations: (0-1)
Relevance of the theme*: 0-2.
Innovation**: 0-2.
* Guidance for relevance assessment:
A paper is relevant if the research topic is related to a current problem and the results given in the resolution contribute something to the field of Occupational Therapy and, if possible, to society. A work will be considered relevant if:
- It brings new knowledge.
- It generates theories that allow the creation of new hypotheses.
- The results are applicable beyond the scope of the study itself.
- The findings are important and suggest societal and/or scientific benefits.
- The occupational therapy practice experience presented has significant implications for professional development.
** Guide for the evaluation of innovation:
A paper is innovative if the topic or methodology, or the approach or setting, among others, is innovative in some respect to what has been researched and published on the subject. A work will be considered innovative if:
• It brings new knowledge.
• Some aspect of the study is novel or adds a new perspective to what already exists.
• A repeat study may be warranted for some reason.
• It is an update of older studies.
• It presents an innovative occupational therapy practice experience.
2. Revision work.
Criteria for research papers and reviews:
Achievable and clearly formulated objectives (0-1)
Design and methodology appropriate to the objectives and well described (0-2)
Clear presentation of the results (0-2)
Conclusions / Recommendations: (0-1)
Relevance of the theme*: 0-2.
Innovation**: 0-2.
* Guidance for relevance assessment:
A paper is relevant if the research topic is related to a current problem and the results given in the resolution contribute something to the field of Occupational Therapy and, if possible, to society. A work will be considered relevant if:
- It brings new knowledge.
- It generates theories that allow the creation of new hypotheses.
- The results are applicable beyond the scope of the study itself.
- The findings are important and suggest societal and/or scientific benefits.
- The occupational therapy practice experience presented has significant implications for professional development.
** Guide for the evaluation of innovation:
A paper is innovative if the topic or methodology, or the approach or setting, among others, is innovative in some respect to what has been researched and published on the subject. A work will be considered innovative if:
• It brings new knowledge.
• Some aspect of the study is novel or adds a new perspective to what already exists.
• A repeat study may be warranted for some reason.
• It is an update of older studies.
• It presents an innovative occupational therapy practice experience.
3. Intervention programmes.
Defines the objectives of the programme (0-1)
Clear and concise definition of the programme (0-1)
Includes a full evaluation of the programme (0-2)
Includes programme results (0-1)
Provides interesting results that allow the programme to be replicated in another population (0-1).
The conclusion is in line with what is observed after the programme (0-1).
Innovation of the intervention, there is no similar programme previously carried out or published, it presents an approach to occupational therapy different from the traditional one for this field and brings a novel change to previously published programmes (0-3).
4. Clinical cases.
Adequate justification of the development of the clinical case (0-2)
Methodology well described and coherent in all its sub-sections (0-2)
Clear presentation of the results (0-2)
Discussion as appropriate to the case and conclusions: (0-2)
Innovation*: 0-2.
* Guide to innovation assessment:
A case is innovative if the topic or methodology, or the approach or scenario, among others, is innovative in some respect to what has been researched and published on the subject. A work will be considered innovative if:
• It brings new knowledge.
• Some aspect of the study is novel or adds a new perspective to what already exists.
• A repeat study may be warranted for some reason.
• It presents an innovative occupational therapy practice experience.
5. Description of clinical services.
Clear description of the centre (0-2)
Description of appropriate and comprehensive occupational therapy service (0-3)
Patient profile clear (0-2)
Service relevance*: 0-1.
Innovation**: 0-2.
* Guidance for relevance assessment:
A service is relevant if it fulfils its purpose, maintains quality criteria and responds to the health or social problem it addresses in the field of Occupational Therapy.
** Guide for the evaluation of innovation:
A service is innovative when the role of the occupational therapist within it, the objectives, conceptual models, strategies, approaches and techniques on which it is based, and the programmes that are developed, are new.
6. Research protocols.
Knowledge gaps and what this study will add to the current evidence (0-2)
Well stated objectives and assumptions (0-2)
Methodology: including description of study population, sample, validated instruments and statistical analysis (0-2)
Relevance of the theme*: 0-2.
Innovation**: 0-2.
* Guidance for relevance assessment:
A paper is relevant if the research topic is related to a current problem and the results given in the resolution contribute something to the field of Occupational Therapy and, if possible, to society. A work will be considered relevant if:
• It provides important insights.
• It generates theories that allow the creation of new hypotheses.
• The results are applicable beyond the scope of the study itself.
• The findings are important and suggest societal and/or scientific benefits.
• The occupational therapy practice experience presented has significant implications for professional development.
** Guide for the evaluation of innovation:
A paper is innovative if the topic or methodology, or the approach or setting, among others, is innovative in some respect to what has been researched and published on the subject. A work will be considered innovative if:
• It brings new knowledge.
• Some aspect of the study is novel or adds a new perspective to what already exists.
• A repeat study may be warranted for some reason.
• It is an update of older studies.
• It presents an innovative occupational therapy practice experience.