Review Procedure

All abstracts submitted to the CRS Annual Meeting will go through a rigorous review procedure to maintain the highest scientific quality of the meeting. Submitted abstracts must meet the following minimum requirements:
  1. Significant and original contribution within the scope of the Controlled Release Society.
  2. Abstract submitted by the deadline.
  3. Written in clear English.
  4. Few syntax/spelling mistakes.
  5. Sufficient data presented, adequately analyzed and discussed with appropriate conclusions supported by the data. If not all data (example: active compound used) can be disclosed due to confidentiality, the abstract will not be rejected immediately; however, the reviewers will decide whether or not it contains enough interesting insights for acceptance. 
  6. Meets format guidelines.
  7. Contains data and tables and figures, clearly presented, to support the data.

Abstract Review

The abstract will be read and scored by the CRS Annual Meeting Program Committee and will be assigned a score based on the following assessment criteria for scientific content.

5

Ground-breaking research of outstanding quality providing a new perspective in a new or emerging field.

4

New research of outstanding quality providing a new perspective in an existing field or new research of high quality in a new or emerging field.

3

New research of high quality providing an enhancement of current understanding in an existing field.

2

Research providing support of current understanding; representing modest or no addition to current understanding in an existing field over and above previously published work; not sufficiently significant and/or original research.

1

Abstract does not comply with minimum submission instructions, is not submitted in the proper format, and/or does not include all required fields. A score of 1 will result in the rejection of an abstract.

© Copyright Controlled Release Society  | Contact Us - Report a Bad Link