• B H Rowe, N Sukhrani, and A Sher.
• Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta. brian.rowe@ualberta.ca
• Can J Emerg Med. 1999 Oct 1;1(3):165-8.

ObjectivesTo examine the 1999 CAEP/AMUQ research abstracts competition in a scientific fashion, and provide descriptive information about the present and future direction of Canadian emergency medicine (EM) research.MethodsUsing a standard evaluation form, 3 volunteer CAEP reviewers rated each submitted abstract in blind fashion. The authors of this report then combined abstract review scores with the following data: research topic, province of origin, status of first author (resident or attending physician), number of authors, adherence to submission guidelines, and acceptance status.ResultsOf 86 abstracts submitted, 80 (93%) originated in Canada. The primary author was a resident in 34 cases (40%), a staff physician in 50 cases (58%) and unspecified in 2 cases (2%). Overall, 77 abstracts (90%) were selected for presentation: 26 (29%) oral, 40 (47%) poster, and 11 (13%) for the Resident Research Competition. The most common topics were clinical care (17%), prehospital care (15%), education/administration (14%), and decision rules (13%). The most common reason for rejection was failure to adhere to submission guidelines.ConclusionsCanadian EM research is growing rapidly, as witnessed by the interest in this competition, the publication of these abstracts, and the increased emphasis placed on research at the national meeting. Researchers must adhere to submission guidelines to increase their chances of abstract acceptance. Methods of promoting Canadian EM research are discussed.

19 keywords...

hide…