Abstract Evaluation Criteria
All abstracts will be evaluated by a Network for a Healthy California Committee Panel. A five point scale (1 = low and 5 = high) will be used with the following criteria.
Appropriateness of topic
- Subject matter pertains to conference participants
- Information is timely
- Contribution is appropriate to conference theme and Network goals
Writing
- Writing is clear and free from jargon
- Abstract is presented in an easy to understandable format
- Provides a clear understanding of the abstract’s intent
Learning objective(s)
- Measurable
- Clearly states what the participant is expected to learn
Purpose
- The reason/need for the study/program/activity is clearly described
Methods
- The sequence in describing how/what was done is logical
- Includes information on participants, materials used, and steps taken
- Explains how to conduct the study/program/activity
- Defines evaluation methods
Results
- Stated succinctly
- Addresses the purpose of the study/program
Conclusion
- Supported by the results
- Addresses predictors for success and/or cautions about limitations to be aware of
Significance/Application
- Builds upon previous studies or current practice
- Contributes to new knowledge or new program/techniques and practice
- Appropriately addresses the Food Stamp Nutrition Education low-income audience
- The presentation addresses health disparities
Value to conference participants
- Identifies how the participants can utilize the information
- Enhanced understanding of techniques or information related to Network goals
- Evidence of an interactive approach