Guidelines for Presenters at the Annual Conference

For an Oral Presentation, slide number 2 must provide information regarding funding of the research and potential conflicts of interest. Please use the provided template. Poster presentations must include information regarding funding of the research and potential conflicts of interest somewhere on the poster. 


The funding section is a mandatory component of a presentation. Presenters or co-presenters must declare sources of study funding including sponsorship (e.g. university, charity, commercial organization) and sources of material (e.g. novel drugs) not available commercially. If no financial assistance was received in support of the study, please include a statement to this fact. 

Conflict of Interest 

This is a mandatory component of a presentation. Presenters and co-presenters must declare whether or not there are any conflicts of interests in relation to the research or work described. In the interests of transparency and to help viewers form their own judgments of potential bias, presenters must declare whether or not there are any competing financial interests in relation to the work described. The presenting author is responsible for submitting a conflict of interest statement on behalf of all co-authors of the abstract. In cases where the presenters declare a competing financial interest, a statement to that effect is included on the second slide of an oral presentation or somewhere on the poster presentation. If no such conflict exists, the statement will simply read that the authors have nothing to disclose. For the purposes of this statement, conflicts of interest are defined as those of a financial nature that, through their potential influence on behavior or content, or from perception of such potential influences, could undermine the objectivity, integrity or perceived value of a publication.

They can include any of the following: 

  • Funding: Research support (including salaries, equipment, supplies, reimbursement for attending symposia, and other expenses) by organizations that may gain or lose financially through this publication. The role of the funding body in the design of the study, collection and analysis of data and decision to publish should be stated. 
  • Employment: Recent (while engaged in the research project), present or anticipated employment by any organization that may gain or lose financially through this publication. This includes positions on an advisory board, board of directors, or other type of management relationship. 
  • Personal financial interests: Stocks or shares in companies that may gain or lose financially through publication; consultation fees or other forms of remuneration from organizations that may gain or lose financially; patents or patent applications whose value may be affected by publication. 
  • Patents: Holding, or currently applying for, patents, relating to the content of a manuscript; receiving reimbursement, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript. 

It is difficult to specify a threshold at which a financial interest becomes significant, but note that many US universities require faculty members to disclose interests exceeding $10,000 or 5% equity in a company. Any such figure is arbitrary, so we offer as one possible practical alternative guideline: “Declare all interests that could embarrass you were they to become publicly known after your work was presented.” We do not consider diversified mutual funds or investment trusts to constitute a competing financial interest. 

The statement included in the submission must contain an explicit and unambiguous description of any potential conflict of interest, or lack thereof, for any of the authors as it relates to the subject of the report. 

Examples include 
    • Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest. 
    • Conflict of interest. Dr Caron has received compensation as a member of the scientific advisory board of Acadia Pharmaceutical and owns stock in the company. He also has consulted for Lundbeck and received compensation. Dr. Rothman and Dr. Jensen declare no potential conflict of interest.

Criteria for Awards and Abstract Reviewers

There are many times when we may want to recuse ourselves from discussions or reviews for awards (including conference awards) and reviews of abstracts.

Reviewers for abstracts or ISES awards should consider recusing themselves from discussions or reviews that may have the perception of bias. This would include if they:

  1. Serve as a current or former advisor/mentor/graduate school committee member of the applicant (award winner, abstract submitter, or other).
  2. Have been an active collaborator with the applicant – within the last 3 years (collaborators include grant submissions, co-authors on publications or presentations).
  3. Could receive a direct/indirect financial benefit by the successful review of the applicant.
  4. Have any other reason that would reasonably pose a potential bias to the outcome.