Reviewing abstracts

This section is for abstract reviewers only.

All reviewers to score abstracts assigned to them, unless you have a conflict of interest.
If so, you can just omit scoring that abstract.

Scoring Guidelines, we ask you to consider the following:

  • hypothesis
  • experimental design
  • creativity
  • innovation
  • scientific results and significance

Use the following scoring system and to use the full range of the scale:
5 – Superior (top 10% of abstracts), highest priority for award, truly excellent and outstanding
4 – Exceptional (top 20% of abstracts), not perfect, but excellent science, high priority for award
3 – Very good (top 35% of abstracts), high quality, but not excellent science
2 – Good, average abstract, but not good enough for award if funding is limited
1 – Low priority, will not be considered for award

Your mean score should be ~2.5, and only 20% should be 4 or higher. (see bar chart below)

Reviewing needs to be completed by end of Tuesday 12th March 2024.

If you need further help please email