Research reports

ECVIM-CA invites submission of research reports for the 35th ECVIM-CA Congress

The research report is a format of research communication at the ECVIM congress that allows young researchers to present fresh cutting-edge research results. This is an extended format of 30 minutes to present multiple studies. It is not the goal to present an extended abstract of one single study. This format is therefore best suited to researchers finishing a PhD or an Habilitation, working in a specific topic. Such as abstracts, accepted research reports will also be published in JVIM

SUBMISSION
Research report will open on 15th of January 2025. You will be informed about the decision before the 1st of July.
Research reports must be submitted online via the research report submission module. The deadline for receipt of the research reports is 23.59 GMT 31 March 2025, and the online research report submission site will be deactivated as of 00.00 GMT on 1 April 2025.

Before submitting, please check carefully that your research report complies with format guidelines as no further changes are allowed after submission. Non compliance with format requirements will lead to automatic rejection.

Please have a look at the examples below:
ADEQUATE research report and INADEQUATE research report

ACKNOWLEDGING SUCCESSFUL SUBMISSION
When your research report is successfully submitted, you will receive an acknowledgement by email, containing details of the exact submission (including title, co-authors, and text). Please take the time to check this carefully and contact the congress secretariat (info@ecvimcongress.org) as soon as possible if there are any errors. Please make sure that you check that co-author details are correct, as these cannot subsequently be changed either. If you do not reply, we will assume that you are happy with the final submitted version. Once the abstract has been reviewed, changes to the abstract cannot be accepted. If an error is subsequently identified, you are free to withdraw your abstract if you wish. During the abstract-upload process, you will need to list all co-authors for your abstract.

*** PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING SECTION CAREFULLY AS THIS IS A COMMON SOURCE OF MISTAKES! ***
Firstly, please note that abstracts are not edited after approval. Therefore, we advise you to proofread your abstract carefully before submission, since it will be printed exactly as submitted.

Also, once the abstract has been reviewed, changes to the abstract cannot be accepted. If an error is subsequently identified, you are free to withdraw your abstract if you wish. During the abstract-upload process, you will need to list all co-authors for your abstract.

ONE MORE TIME, please note that, after an abstract has undergone review and has been accepted, we cannot accept any changes in authorship, titles or the content of the abstract etc. Research communications are automatically rejected without further scrutiny if they:

•Are not submitted online
•Are received after closing date (1 April 2025)
•Contain fewer than 200 words (excluding title and author details)
•Exceed 400 words in length (excluding title and author details)
•Contain subheadings
•Are published or accepted elsewhere before 1 April 2025
•Are not written in scientific English
•Are too preliminary in nature or are deemed to be of low scientific quality
•Contain tables, graphs or figures
•Are not relevant to small animal internal medicine
•Are deemed to be unethical
•Contain subheadings in bold
•Contain abbreviations in the title
•If you should have any questions, please contact the congress secretary (info@ecvimcongress.org). 

Please have a look at the examples below:
ADEQUATE Abstract and INADEQUATE Abstract

The executive committee reserves the right to edit the abstract in the required format without notifying the author.
The executive committee reserves the right to move the abstract to another society. The author will be informed about this via email.

AFFILIATIONS
Please note that affiliations (names, companies, universities, institutions, etc.) may not be used anymore in the title of the research report or in the text. Research reports are blindly reviewed.

RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
Research communications should report recent clinical research, which is original in nature. Reviews will not be accepted, and you are strongly discouraged from submitting preliminary results from ongoing trials. Research reports containing any form of advertisement will be rejected. No research report may be submitted that has been previously presented (in its current format) at an international European or American meeting. Prior presentation and publication of parts of the research is allowed. Research reports presented at national meetings may be submitted but the same report presented at two separate meetings will only count as one presentation for the purposes of credentialing. Contents must be significantly different or include new information if a similar research report was presented earlier. During the research report upload process, you will need to list all co-authors for your abstract.

STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURES
At the time of submission, we now require all presenters of abstracts and research reports to provide a statement, on behalf of all co-authors, regarding any disclosures for their work.  This enables congress attendees to determine whether or not there may have been bias or the perception of bias.  This can occur when any of the authors (or someone related to the authors e.g. family member, spouse, friend) has a relationship with any entity that has an interest (direct or indirect) related to the submission. Examples include:

• Any form of support (financial or otherwise) for the study described in the abstract
• Any form of support for other work that that the authors are involved in.
• Financial relationships (which may be unrelated to the subject matter of the abstract) whereby the individual or a relative benefits by receiving a salary, royalties, consulting fees, speaker honoraria, ownership interests (e.g. stock or stock options), or other benefits.
• Indirect benefits i.e. where the author, or author's institution, benefits from the results of the study. An example would be where the author (or their institution) runs a laboratory service, which performs an assay that is discussed in the abstract.
• Failure to declare a conflict of interest can lead to rejection of the research report or prohibiting authors from submitting abstracts to future congresses.

Please note that it is best to practise 'full disclosure' and err on the side of caution; if in doubt, please include the item, and the Congress Committee will then decide whether or not it needs to be reported.  Please include in the text box provided an explanation that includes the name(s) of the author(s) involved, name of the commercial entity, and the nature of the relationship.

Every speaker must also display their disclosures on the second slide of their presentation (i.e. immediately following the title slide).  Please see the link for an example disclosure slide.  Speakers who do not comply with this will be prohibited from presenting at future congresses.

ETHICAL APPROVAL OF YOUR STUDY
ECVIM requires each abstract and research report author to complete an ethical statement. Submission of abstracts and research reports is only possible after this ethical statement is submitted.

Please choose one of the following options:
1. Official ethical approval form (signed) submitted. Official ethical approval form (signed) submitted. Proof of ethical approval should be provided in the form of a copy of a formal, dated and signed approval letter from your local ethics committee. In case the approval is not in English, the ECVIM Congress committee may request a translation, if deemed necessary.

2. Although this study involves a prospective evaluation or invasive procedures (e.g. samples obtained by any procedure similarly or more invasive than needle insertion) or procedures not done for direct benefit of the patients, no ethical approval was obtained for the following reason(s): (please state your reasons)

(If investigations were performed in samples of blood or urine (cystocentesis) collected for clinical purposes in the benefit of the patient, please tick this box and state that all analysis were performed in leftover samples)

3. No ethical approval was obtained because this study did not involve a prospective evaluation, did not involve laboratory animals and only involved non-invasive procedures (e.g. faecal samples, voided urine etc).

GUIDANCE NOTES
Submission of a signed official ethical approval is mandatory for any study performed on laboratory animals and for any cross-sectional or prospective study performed on client-owned animals involving invasive procedures (e.g. samples obtained by any procedure similarly or more invasive than needle insertion) or any procedure not performed for the direct benefit of the patient. 

Proof of ethical approval should be provided in the form of a copy of a formal, dated and signed approval letter from your local ethics committee. In case the approval is not in English, the ECVIM Congress committee may request a translation, if deemed necessary. 

If surplus material (i.e. from samples obtained for diagnostic purposes) was used, but you did not obtain ethical approval, please clarify this by ticking the second option, and provide a justification. In such cases, the justification must be credible i.e. the benefit of the procedure to the animal must be logical and appropriate to the case, and would be acceptable if it were explained to a layperson. The use of surplus material should be clearly stated in the research report.

ECVIM reserves the right to reject any research reports not meeting the above criteria, where proof of ethical review is not provided along with the abstract, or the justification for exemption from ethical review is not credible.

If you are planning a research study, please consider that, more likely than not, proof of ethical review will be required. Going through the process of ethical scrutiny provides assurance to the participants and to the publishers of research that ethical issues have been carefully assessed and the design and conduct of the research meets agreed standards. 

Ethical review can only be effectively carried out prior to the research being conducted. 

Ethical issues may arise from many areas such as:

•Recruitment of patients
•Data collection and protection; questionnaires
•Ownership of data or clinical material
•Any potential to cause harm or distress to an animal or owner participating in a research study
•Breaching confidentiality of the owner of an animal during the conduct of the research or its publication
•Need for informed consent
•Study designs where decision-making is determined by the study design (e.g. randomisation) rather than the attending veterinary surgeon

For additional information on ethical issues in clinical research you can consult the RCVS-BVA joint statement on ethical review for practice-based research http://www.rcvs.org.uk/publications/ethical-review-for-practice-based-research/ .

COPYRIGHT
By submitting a research communication and submission form, the author(s) transfer copyright ownership so it can be published in the online congress proceedings, JVIM or JVCP.

PRESENTATIONS
Accepted research reports need to be presented in person in Lyon.

EVALUATION
All research reports will be evaluated by the scientific committee using the following criteria: scientific content, experimental design, animal welfare, and relevance to small animal medicine. The corresponding author will be notified about the decision before 1 July 2024.

FORMAT - LAYOUT
The research report MUST be between 200 and 400 words in length (excluding title and author details). The format of the research report is flexible, but should contain information on the aim of the work, methods, results and conclusions. A statement that “the results will be discussed” is not acceptable. Subheadings (methods, results, etc.) are NOT allowed. Tables, graphs and figures are NOT allowed. References are NOT allowed. 

Please note that affiliations (names, companies, universities, institutions, etc.) may not be used anymore in the title of the abstract or in the abstract text. Abstracts are blindly reviewed.