Research ExplorerPublicationsAccepted Standards on How to Give a Medical Research Present...

Accepted Standards on How to Give a Medical Research Presentation: A Systematic Review of Expert Opinion Papers

Standard

Accepted Standards on How to Give a Medical Research Presentation: A Systematic Review of Expert Opinion Papers. / Blome, Christine; Sondermann, Hanno; Augustin, Matthias.

In: GMS J MED EDU, Vol. 34, No. 1, 2017, p. Doc11.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Review article › Research

Harvard

Blome, C, Sondermann, H & Augustin, M 2017, 'Accepted Standards on How to Give a Medical Research Presentation: A Systematic Review of Expert Opinion Papers', GMS J MED EDU, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. Doc11. https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001088

APA

Blome, C., Sondermann, H., & Augustin, M. (2017). Accepted Standards on How to Give a Medical Research Presentation: A Systematic Review of Expert Opinion Papers. GMS J MED EDU, 34(1), Doc11. https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001088

Vancouver

Blome C, Sondermann H, Augustin M. Accepted Standards on How to Give a Medical Research Presentation: A Systematic Review of Expert Opinion Papers. GMS J MED EDU. 2017;34(1):Doc11. https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001088

Bibtex

@article{aac1c5b8c26b42c2be9dc321e6c7d17d,
title = "Accepted Standards on How to Give a Medical Research Presentation: A Systematic Review of Expert Opinion Papers",
abstract = "Background: This systematic review aimed to extract recommendations from expert opinion articles on how to give a medical research presentation on a scientific conference and to determine whether the experts agree on what makes an effective or poor presentation. Methods: Presentation-related terms were searched within article titles listed in PubMed, restricting the search to English-language articles published from January 1975 to July 2015. Recommendations were extracted from the articles, grouped by content, and analyzed for frequency. Ninety-one articles were included. Among 679 different recommendations, 29 were given in more than 20% of articles each. The five most frequent recommendations were to keep slides simple, adjust the talk to the audience, rehearse, not read the talk from slides or a manuscript, and make eye contact. Results: No article gave advice that was the complete opposite of the 29 most frequent recommendations with the exception of whether a light or dark background should be used for slides. Conclusions: Researchers should comply with these widely accepted standards to be perceived as effective presenters.",
keywords = "Journal Article",
author = "Christine Blome and Hanno Sondermann and Matthias Augustin",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.3205/zma001088",
language = "English",
volume = "34",
pages = "Doc11",
journal = "GMS J MED EDU",
issn = "2366-5017",
publisher = "German Medical Science",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Accepted Standards on How to Give a Medical Research Presentation: A Systematic Review of Expert Opinion Papers

AU - Blome, Christine

AU - Sondermann, Hanno

AU - Augustin, Matthias

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Background: This systematic review aimed to extract recommendations from expert opinion articles on how to give a medical research presentation on a scientific conference and to determine whether the experts agree on what makes an effective or poor presentation. Methods: Presentation-related terms were searched within article titles listed in PubMed, restricting the search to English-language articles published from January 1975 to July 2015. Recommendations were extracted from the articles, grouped by content, and analyzed for frequency. Ninety-one articles were included. Among 679 different recommendations, 29 were given in more than 20% of articles each. The five most frequent recommendations were to keep slides simple, adjust the talk to the audience, rehearse, not read the talk from slides or a manuscript, and make eye contact. Results: No article gave advice that was the complete opposite of the 29 most frequent recommendations with the exception of whether a light or dark background should be used for slides. Conclusions: Researchers should comply with these widely accepted standards to be perceived as effective presenters.

AB - Background: This systematic review aimed to extract recommendations from expert opinion articles on how to give a medical research presentation on a scientific conference and to determine whether the experts agree on what makes an effective or poor presentation. Methods: Presentation-related terms were searched within article titles listed in PubMed, restricting the search to English-language articles published from January 1975 to July 2015. Recommendations were extracted from the articles, grouped by content, and analyzed for frequency. Ninety-one articles were included. Among 679 different recommendations, 29 were given in more than 20% of articles each. The five most frequent recommendations were to keep slides simple, adjust the talk to the audience, rehearse, not read the talk from slides or a manuscript, and make eye contact. Results: No article gave advice that was the complete opposite of the 29 most frequent recommendations with the exception of whether a light or dark background should be used for slides. Conclusions: Researchers should comply with these widely accepted standards to be perceived as effective presenters.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.3205/zma001088

DO - 10.3205/zma001088

M3 - SCORING: Review article

C2 - 28293678

VL - 34

SP - Doc11

JO - GMS J MED EDU

JF - GMS J MED EDU

SN - 2366-5017

IS - 1

ER -