TACLS Scientific Poster Competition: Information & Guidelines
The TACLS Scientific Poster Competition Committee is soliciting abstract submissions for
poster presentations at the 2016 TACLS State Meeting. Abstract and Submission Form
Deadline is February 26.
General Information
A.
Presenter Categories
1.
Students
Undergraduate: current ASCLS Student Members enrolled in a NAACLSaccredited MLS or MLT program
Graduate: ASCLS Member either currently enrolled as a graduate student
or was enrolled as a graduate student at the time research was conducted
2.
Professionals
B.
Content Categories
Abstracts are evaluated based on their content and categorized into the following content
areas. No literature reviews will be accepted.
1.
Clinical Case Study
A clinical case study describes a clinical problem and the means used to resolve it.
The case may involve a patient or patients with unusual clinical disease
presentations, complications or outcomes. The clinical diagnosis requires a battery
of relevant laboratory tests to confirm.
Abstracts for a clinical case study should include:
•
A short description of the patient history/presentation/problem
•
Significant diagnostic laboratory tests results
•
Patient outcome
•
Brief description of the disease/condition
2.
Education Case Study
An education case study could involve academic issues such as student
admission/dismissal policy, competency testing, recruitment and retention, or a
description of an innovative education model. The case should present strategies
used to resolve the dilemma or to place the education model in practice and
describe the significance and implication of the issue to clinical laboratory practice.
Abstracts for an education case study should include:
•
A short description of the issue
•
Underlying principle for resolving the issue
•
Brief description of the strategies used
•
Outcome or resolution
1
3.
Research
A research presentation characterizes an original structured investigation of a
specific problem relevant to clinical laboratory science. The research abstract must
include all of the following:
•
Study’s objective
•
Brief description of methods
•
Results summary
•
Statement of conclusion
When submitting abstracts in the Research Category, the research study should be
complete; however, abstracts with significant preliminary results where preliminary
conclusions/inferences can be drawn will be considered. Do not use headers,
references, charts, figures or tables in the abstract.
Abstract Preparation
• Title: Use a concise title (5 or 6 words, if possible) that reflects abstract content. Title should be
flush left. Capitalize the first letter of first word and all other words except prepositions,
conjunctions, and articles. Underline or italicize scientific genus and species names of
organisms. Do not use acronyms, abbreviations, and initials in a title.
• Author/Institution: List the presenting author first, in boldface type. List author institution
affiliation (excluding department or division information) below each author’s name, followed
by the city and state of the institution, except when authors share the same institution affiliation.
Single-space author information. (See sample abstracts on page 5 for reference.)
• Abstract: All abstracts must be typed double-spaced with 1-inch margins; Times New Roman
is the recommended font, 12-point type. Abstract text format is flush left. Text length (not
including title and author information) must not exceed 300 words. (See sample abstracts on
page 5 for reference.)
Abstract Submission
• All abstract proposals must be submitted electronically (MS Word, no pdf) with a fully
completed and signed submission form. Follow above instructions for preparation and
submission.
• Only abstracts submitted electronically will be considered for review; mailed or faxed copies are
not accepted. Email the abstract and completed & signed submission form to
sataylor@tarleton.edu . Acknowledgement of receipt will be sent by email.
Review, Acceptance, and Notification
Members of the TACLS Scientific Poster Presentation Committee will review all abstract
submissions. Authors receive written notification of abstract acceptance or rejection by early
March. The letter of acceptance will include information on the presentation date and time of the
2
presentation. In the event an abstract is accepted with revisions, edited revisions are re-submitted
electronically for further review and final acceptance. Abstracts failing to meet the revision
deadlines are rejected.
Poster Display Provisions
Poster presentation authors are provided with an approximately 4-foot-high x 8-foot-wide bulletin
board to display their poster. Poster specifications are included in the abstract acceptance letter.
Questions
Direct your questions regarding these instructions to …..
Sara Taylor, PhD, MLS(ASCP)MB
Chair, TACLS Scientific Poster Presentation Committee
Phone number: 817.926.1101, email address: sataylor@tarleton.edu
3
TACLS Scientific Poster Competition: Submission
This submission form and accompanying abstract must be received by February 26, 2016.
Please use one form per presentation.
I hereby request that my abstract be considered for poster presentation at 2016 TACLS State
Meeting and that it be entered in the Scientific Poster Competition. I understand that participation
requires my registration and attendance and that the associated costs are my responsibility.
Abstract title:
Abstract author (s):
ASCLS member number/numbers (student or professional):
Presenting Author’s Phone:
Presenting Author’s E-mail address:
Education program or Institutional affiliation:
Indicate if submission is:
[ ] Undergraduate Student Scientific Poster
[ ] Graduate Student Scientific Poster
[ ] MLS Professional Scientific Poster
Presenting author’s signature:
Abstract and Submission Form Deadline is February 26
Authors must submit their abstract and signed abstract submission form by February 26. The
abstract must be submitted electronically as an MS Word file, not a PDF, and signed abstract
submission form may be scanned and emailed. Send to …..
Sara Taylor, PhD, MLS(ASCP)MB
Chair, TACLS Scientific Poster Presentation Committee
email address: sataylor@tarleton.edu
4
Sample Abstract - Clinical Case Study
An Unusual Transformation of Hairy Cell Leukemia
Cheryl Burns, MS, MLS(ASCP)
UT Health Science Center-San Antonio
San Antonio, TX
Hairy cell leukemia (HCL) is a malignant lymphoid neoplasm which represents approximately 2%
of all adult leukemias. The presenting features of this disorder are splenomegaly, pancytopenia,
and the presence of the typical hairy cells in the peripheral blood and bone marrow. Patients
treated by splenectomy have a median survival of approximately 7 years. A small number of
patients will undergo a transformation to a high-grade malignant lymphoma. These two cases
represent this transformation. At initial diagnosis, both patients displayed the typical features of
hairy cell leukemia and were treated by splenectomy. Each patient had remained in remission for
approximately 10 years. In the first patient, a 54-year-old male, the transformation to high-grade
lymphoma was revealed in a biopsy of a hepatic flexure mass. In the second patient, a 62-year-old
male, the transformation was revealed in a biopsy of a lymph node. The malignant lymphoma
cells in both cases were characterized by morphologic and immunologic examination. However,
the bone marrow for both patients demonstrated only relapse of the hairy cell leukemia.
5
Sample Abstract - Research
Comparison of Reticulocyte Results Utilizing Two Different Flow Cytometers and the
Manual Miller Disc
Shirlyn B. McKenzie, PhD, MLS(ASCP)SH
Cheryl Burns, MS, MLS(ASCP)
UT Health Science Center-San Antonio
San Antonio, TX
Reticulocytes were analyzed using two different methods of analysis, flow cytometric and manual
with Miller disc. Comparison was made between results of two different flow cytometers and the
manual method. Each method was also tested for precision. Samples were held for up to 48 hours
at 4oC and retested by the flow cytometers to estimate stability of the specimens. All samples were
whole blood specimens collected in EDTA anticoagulant from hospitalized patients. Sixty
specimens were tested on the FACScan in replicate within four hours of collection. A random
sample (43) of these specimens was selected and tested in replicate within four hours by the
manual method. Flow cytometer specimens were refrigerated and retested at intervals up to 30
hours on the FACScan. The procedure was repeated with a new sample of 60 specimens utilizing
the Coulter Epics. These specimens were retested at intervals up to 48 hours. Another sample (60)
was collected and tested on both the FACScan and Coulter Epics. Analysis by t-test revealed no
statistical differences between replicates indicating all methods were acceptably precise but the
flow cytometers were more precise than the manual method. Comparison between methods
showed low correlation between the manual method and FACScan (r = .664) but higher correlation
between the manual method and Coulter Epics (r = .813) and between the two flow cytometers (r =
.977). The flow cytometers gave consistently higher results than the manual methods. Analysis
over time revealed that there was significant statistical difference in results after 8 hours. The flow
cytometers provide a precise analysis of reticulocytes that may translate into a more effective use
6
of the reticulocyte count in monitoring erythropoietic activity following therapy or bone marrow
transplant. Since the reticulocyte count is relatively stable, samples can be batched for analysis
making this a time-saving method.
7