Guidelines for Review and Selection of Abstracts


The abstract submission portal has closed. Please direct any questions to the Education Team at

Abstract Review Process

  1. All abstracts submitted to the Annual Conference will be evaluated by iThenticate (or similar) software to verify the originality of the work. This is used to verify content has not been plagiarized (including self-plagiarism) and cross-references published matter against the submission.
  2. 1.1 Submissions with iThenticate scores of 40% or greater will be subject to review by conference planners. The author will be sent a warning letter and requested to advise the appropriate parties on how the material differs from previously published or presented matter.

    1.2 Submissions with iThenticate scores of 75% or greater will not be considered for presentation at the Annual Conference.

  3. The conference planners will review iThenticate results and provide feedback on those abstracts scoring 40% or greater as per item 1.1 above. Abstracts that meet acceptable iThenticate criteria are advanced to Section Chairs for the next review step.
  4. The Abstract Chair(s) performs a final review of all abstracts and determines whether to accept or reject for the appropriate category.
  5. The Program Chair(s) may perform an additional review, as needed, after the Abstract Chair review process.
  6. Full disclosure (regarding conflicts of interest and details in methodology) must be shared, visually and verbally, at the time of presentation. Abstracts that cannot meet this requirement should not be submitted as they will not meet the criteria for acceptance.

** Note: If an abstract is suggested for an alternate category other than the one submitted, the author will be notified and allowed the right of refusal for the category change. If the author declines the new abstract category, the abstract may not be accepted, or the author may request that it be withdrawn. 


Guidelines and Expectations for All Abstracts


  • Abstracts previously published or presented prior to the upcoming ASLMS Annual Conference will not be accepted. ASLMS uses the iThenticate software to validate originality.


  • All scientific research referred to, reported on, or used in the abstract must conform to the generally accepted standards of experimental design, data collection, and analysis. Abstracts selected for presentation will be limited to those that meet those standards.
  • Abstracts should feature category-specific data with the expectation of full disclosure regarding methods and materials.
  • Abstracts must contain valid content and should accurately reflect work that has been performed. Statements such as "results will be discussed” are unacceptable.
  • The number of patients in the study will be considered (20 minimum). Scientific, well-designed studies are given preference over anecdotal findings with a single experiment or case.
  • Recommendations in the abstract involving clinical medicine must be based on evidence that is accepted within the profession of medicine as adequate justification for their indications and contraindications in the care of patients.
  • The abstract must not present recommendations, treatment, or manners of practicing medicine that are not within the definitions noted above, are known to have risks or dangers that outweigh the benefits, or are known to be ineffective in treating patients.


  • The purpose of our conference is to disseminate accurate, balanced, and objective information regarding lasers, other optical sources, and related technologies in medicine and surgery. This purpose is best served by including presentations that are varied in terms of topics and presenters.
  • Abstracts must be of high quality and be presented with no bias toward a specific company(ies) or device(s).


  • Each author of an abstract submitted to ASLMS must have contributed significantly to the research and assumed responsibility for the abstract's content.
  • There is no limit to how many submissions an author can be a part of; however, to provide a diversity of input, authors may only be the presenter of a maximum of two (2) separate abstracts at the annual conference, no matter what session type (i.e. main abstract category, early career, etc.) they are selected to present in.

Additional abstract guidelines

  • There is a 500-word limit for each block of text provided for the abstract submission (i.e. description, background, conclusion, etc.).
  • Any references provided with the abstract submission are what will be published.
  • Once an abstract has been selected, ASLMS will provide a PowerPoint template to each presenting author so they can begin working on their slides. Presenters will not be restricted as to the number of slides that can be provided, as long as the information can be shared within the given time frame. There will be flexibility regarding the formatting of the slides, however, presenters are cautioned not to include specific company information or company logos.
  • A minimum of 3-4 minutes is anticipated to be provided for each abstract presentation. That is subject to change due to the total number of abstracts that are selected.


  • Full disclosure of any and all financial relationships with eligible and ineligible entities for the past 24 months is required of ALL authors and co-authors before abstract consideration. Authors who do not submit disclosure information by the required deadline will first be notified with a request to submit immediately. If the notified author or co-author does not comply, the presenting author has the discretion to remove the non-complying author(s) name from the abstract or withdraw the abstract from consideration. 

Additional Guidelines and Expectations for Scientific Abstracts

Submitted abstracts must contain the following elements:

  • Clear research problem and/or translational potential based on the hypothesis-driven scientific rationale.
  • Appropriate and clearly explained techniques with creative research or common techniques with a “novel issues and questions" approach.
  • Clearly described number of experiments/animals with clearly defined measures such as: the use of controls, bioassays, behavioral tests, data analysis/statistical analysis procedures, specific device and/or treatment parameters, and other measures.
  • Clearly presented results with demonstrated significance presented as quantitative data with proper statistical information such as standard deviation (SD), standard error of mean (SEM), n- and p-values, and the relationship of the hypothesis and the results addressed.
  • Conclusions should accurately reflect the results, address the hypothesis, and be placed in a broader context with a discussion of the translational potential of the research.