Submissions and guidelines

PLEASE CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT YOUR GPI

GPI SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

GPIs must be linked to one of the sections of the European Statements of Hospital Pharmacy approved at the European Summit on Hospital Pharmacy in May 2014.

The EAHP statements are separated into the 6 themes below:

  1. Introductory Statements and Governance    
  2. Selection, Procurement and Distribution
  3. Production and Compounding
  4. Clinical Pharmacy Services
  5. Patient Safety and Quality Assurance
  6. Education and Research

GPIs can continually be submitted at the EAHP-homepage. There will be one closing deadline a year: 15 October. GPIs submitted by this deadline will be evaluated and, in case of acceptance, uploaded to the GPI-database within 45 days from the deadline. Should changes be foreseen, authors will be notified by the EAHP secretariat.


GPI-DATABASE

The GPI-database will be updated once a year following the closing deadline mentioned above.


GPI STRUCTURE

The structure of an EAHP congress GPI submission has to be strictly adhered to. The online GPI submission guidelines will guide you through this process. Submissions are limited to no more than 350 words (or less if you use graphs or tables) and must be typed in English. The online submission system does not allow you to enter GPIs above this limit.

  • Title: The title of the GPI must be strictly coherent with the data included in the text. Do not use abbreviations.
  • Contact data: The name of every author, preceded by initials, and the name of the presenting author should be underlined and entered as instructed via the online submission process. Omit degrees, titles or institutional appointments. Then, insert the institution, city, country where the initiative took place, as well as the email address of the presenting author.

GPI submission must be structured and written in five paragraphs as follows:

  • What was done? Please explain the initiative that you developed and implemented.
  • Why was it done? Please include a brief background to the reasons why and when the initiative was introduced. This may include identifying the problem before and how this particular GPI attempted to improve the situation. This section should include a clear aim of the GPI. 
  • How was it done? Please indicate any obstacles to the introduction of this initiative that had to be overcome expand on how these obstacles were overcome for the successful implementation.
  • What has been achieved? Please display the results of the initiative's introduction. These may include audit results, publications, cost saving or improvements in patient safety.
  • What next? Why it should be considered an example of good practice and how it could be transferred into other healthcare settings.
  • References and/or Acknowledgements may be given at the end of the submission
 
  • Abbreviations may be used only if they are defined (spelled out them in full text at first mention, followed by the abbreviation between brackets)
  • Don't use excessive decimals e.g. a person might weigh 70,237 kg at a given moment, but only 70 kg should be mentioned.
  • References should be avoided or limited to a minimum, unless they are important for understanding the developed initiative, its background and the achievements. Comprehensive bibliography can be displayed on the poster.


THE SUBMISSION PROCESS

For every GPI there must be three keywords selected by the authors. These are used for indexing purposes and have to be strictly in line with the content of the related initiative and the relevant EAHP Statements. Make sure to write the full address of your hospital! Otherwise it will not appear in our GPI map. 


THE REVIEW PROCESS

  • Each GPI is read, assessed and scored independently by four members of the Scientific Committee (SC).
  • In case of divergence between the two reviewers, the full SC discusses the submission in plenum and comes to a view whether to accept the GPI or not.
  • You will be notified in a timely manner as to the outcomes of the review process. 
  • All accepted abstracts will be allocated a spot for display at the congress
  • Only those GPIs that are considered to have a high grade of relevance, originality, added value and be transferable to other countries, settings in a well-written form are eligible for an oral presentation and winning the poster prize.


REASONS FOR REJECTION

  • A basic criteria for acceptance is that your work must be of relevance to Hospital Pharmacists. It is not clear what is the added value for hospital pharmacist.
  • The committee did not understand the abstract either due to English use or other reasons.
  • The abstract presents irrelevant outcomes
  • The abstract is a literature review, which does not comply with the criteria for categorization as a GPI
  • The abstract does not follow the given structure.
  • The conclusion does not cover the aim of the study.
  • Insufficient/no data was included to support your conclusions.
  • The abstract does not clearly describe, why it was done.
  • The abstract does not clearly describe, what was done and/or the intervention is not clearly described.
  • The abstract does not clearly describe, what has been achieved.
  • The abstract does not clearly describe, what is next.
  • The abstract may be better suited as a scientific abstract. Please resubmit using the appropriate format.
  • The practice described cannot be categorised as a GPI.
  • Other


RECCOMENDATIONS

  • Consider using common and correct scientific terminology, regarding e.g. efficacy, effectiveness, and safety.
  • Consider the coherence of the submission. If not coherent, please strongly consider rewriting your submission.
  • The word count has to be adhered to. Be aware, that this is a GPI submission; and not the poster itself.
  • Please avoid formatting of submissions, don't use bold type, and ensure at the final checking stage that any special characters or symbols used are displayed correctly.
  • GPI submissions reporting vague or unclear interventions and/or irrelevant outcomes will be rejected. 


Good LUCK to all!
 
The EAHP Scientific Committee
Last update: 11 July 2019