Inside the Annual Meeting
A Rehash of the ASH Dash
on the day of the ASH Annual Meeting abstract submission deadline , thousands of authors sit down at their laptops to submit their abstracts for inclusion in the annual meeting . That process involves ( but is not limited to ) finding misplaced log-in info ; tracking down errant statistician reports ; editing and re-editing introductions and conclusions to fit within the 3,800-character limit ; and filling out the appropriate author names , affiliations , and disclosures – all before the clock strikes midnight ( Pacific time , of course ).
If everything goes smoothly , authors can expect an automatically generated confirmation message from the abstract management system and can breathe a sigh of relief .
That ’ s where the “ ASH dash ” for authors ends , but , for ASH meetings staff , the race has just begun . In eight weeks , ASH staff and hundreds of volunteer reviewers sift through more than 6,000 submissions to create the final abstract line-up .
How exactly does this happen ? Communication , time tracking , and dedication , according to Joanna Robertson , senior manager of annual meeting publications at ASH . Ms . Robertson spoke with ASH Clinical News to give readers a glimpse into how abstracts are selected , who reviews them , and why procrastination doesn ’ t pay .
What one thing would you like readers to know about the abstract submission process ? Most people wait until the last minute to start their submission . I don ’ t think they know that they can start their submission at any time and update it throughout the submission period . Entering a lengthy author list takes time – especially on the last day when the system is busy – so why not start early , even if the authorship isn ’ t finalized ? The only hard-and-fast rule is that it must be completed by 11:59 p . m . Pacific time on the closing date .
We try to help anybody who contacted us about technical difficulties on the night the submission window closes , but we cannot accept abstracts that are emailed to us after the site closes . People call us days after the deadline , asking for an extension , sometimes crying because they might get fired because they didn ’ t submit in time . Our hearts bleed for them but , unfortunately , we cannot make exceptions for people who did not contact us before the deadline .
If I could tell authors having last-minute trouble one thing , it would be , “ Please talk to us !”
We know what the abstract submission process looks like from the author perspective , but how does it look from the staff perspective ? The day that the site opens is a drop in the bucket . In any given year , we might receive one completed abstract submission during the first week of the submission window , and maybe a couple dozen more by the end of the third week . Our busiest , all hands-on-deck time is the last three days before the submission site closes . That ’ s when we ’ re getting 1,000 to 3,000 abstract submissions started each day .
On those three days , we ’ re fielding hundreds of emails and phone calls from people working through the submission process . My colleague and I monitor the “ abstracts inbox ” until midnight ( Eastern time ) of the closing date , in alternating , four-hour shifts to make sure we ’ re staying on top of queries .
Our tech support team also is available to answer log-in questions , and our membership team is working to check authors ’ membership status and to process payments of back dues for people who need to reactivate their membership . It keeps us on our toes .
How are reviewers chosen ? With 61 categories to review ( and a few categories so large that they are divided between two review teams ), we need 65 six-person review teams , for a total of 390 reviewers . Reviewers are nominated by reviewers from previous years or by self-nomination . We update our review team rosters every year . We only require that the lead reviewer of each team served in the previous year so we have an experienced leader .
We average 1,500 nominees every year . After researching nominees ’ recent publications , affiliation , location , career level , and other factors , we present the ASH Secretary , Robert Brodsky , MD , with the complete list of nominees . He will then review the list and assemble 65 balanced , ideal “ dream teams .”
How do you pull everything off ? It works because of Excel spreadsheets , down-to-the-minute time tracking , and our VIPs – the reviewers who volunteer their time , knowledge , and expertise to help make our meeting great .
Can you walk us through what happens after the abstract submission site closes ? Once the abstract submission site closes , we get down to business . The selection process is composed of a carefully plotted series of events that is outlined in an eight-page spreadsheet , and each step is allotted a certain amount of time .
Days 1-2 :
Days 2-12 :
We clean up the abstract management system , running several in-depth reports to identify any incomplete abstracts , duplicate submissions , or abstracts without payment , and contact the authors to give them an opportunity to resolve the issue .
Our volunteer review teams score their assigned abstracts . Reviewers are blinded to the authors ’ names and institutions . They can enter comments or recuse themselves because of conflicts of interest , and all of that is considered when the scores are aggregated . During this period , our staff monitor their inboxes 24 / 7 to make sure the process is running smoothly .
Days 13-19 : Over a series of 65 conference calls , each team , along with 48 ASH staff trained to monitor the calls , decides how to fill the presentation slots awarded to their categories . Because we strive for geographic diversity on our review teams , that can mean random call times . I ’ ve had staff wake up for calls at 4:00 a . m .; I just did one at 11:00 p . m . for this year ’ s meeting .
On these calls , the review teams consider each abstract ’ s average score and decide which will be oral , poster , or online-only presentations .
Days 20-35 : After another round of clean-up , we deliver the results to the ASH Secretary , who has 10 days to review approximately 400 abstracts that require his attention to ensure all ASH policies are being followed .
Days 36-44 : Once we enter the Secretary ’ s decisions into the system and identify replacement abstracts where necessary , the ASH Program Committee begins their work . In the week prior to their mid-September meeting ( held at ASH headquarters in Washington , DC ), the committee members review the proposed sessions to ensure they are balanced . At the meeting , the program committee selects the plenary abstracts and discusses any concerns before finally approving the abstracts program . Their recommendations then go to the Executive Committee for final approval .
Days 45-59 : Once the Program Committee and the Executive Committee approve the annual meeting program , we start notifying authors , beginning with the plenary abstracts . We spend the next two weeks preparing the accepted abstracts ; this includes processing abstract withdrawals , checking for time conflicts for the presenters , working around schedules of anyone who can ’ t work on certain days due to a religious conflict , running multiple conflict reports , assigning abstracts their final numbers , and a thousand other contingencies .
We check and recheck our decisions , rescheduling them as we need to , and then lock the program down . Then , and only then , can we send notifications . ●
Interested in reviewing abstracts for the next ASH Annual Meeting ? Email abstractreviewers @ hematology . org at any time during the year . ASH staff will follow up when the nomination window is open .
80 ASH Clinical News November 2017