Updates

Texas Children's Global Health NWM 2025: Abstract Submission

<p>NWM 2025: Abstract Submission</p>

“Innovating Under Pressure: Creative Solutions Amid Resource Constraints.”

3-7 November 2025  
Johannesburg, South Africa  
aha-Kopanong Hotel and Conference Centre

Abstract Types & Submission

Option 1: Scientific Research Abstracts 

Best suited for: Original research studies using formal research methodology across any discipline.

Scientific Research Abstracts are appropriate for submissions that describe original research with a clearly defined research question, study design, and analysis plan. These projects are typically hypothesis-driven and aim to generate new knowledge or test existing theories. Research may be quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods in nature.

Use this category if:

  • Your project involved data collection and formal analysis to answer a specific research question.
  • You are presenting novel research findings rather than describing implementation or quality improvement.
  • Your work received IRB/ethical approval or was exempt.

These abstracts should contain the following sections: 

  • ​Background: Clearly state the purpose and objective of the research, the gap in knowledge being addressed, and the specific research question or aim of the study.   
  • ​Methods: Describe the study period, setting and location, study design, study population, data collection, and data analysis used. Were there any ethical considerations/IRB approvals?
  • ​Results: Present the study findings in as much detail as possible, including statistical results or qualitative themes.
  • ​Conclusions: Explain the significance of your findings for clinical care, policy, or future research. Discuss the strengths and limitations of your study and implications for future work.

Option 2: Quality Improvement Abstracts 

Best suited for: Projects using quality improvement (QI) methods to improve systems, processes, or outcomes in healthcare delivery.

Quality Improvement Abstracts are designed for projects that apply systematic approaches to assess and enhance professional practice or service delivery. These projects often use iterative cycles of testing and evaluation (e.g., PDSA cycles), and aim to produce local or system-level improvements.

Use this category if:

  • Your project focused on improving clinical or operational process, outcome, or system using recognized QI tools or frameworks
  • You tested a change idea in a real-world setting and tracked results over time.
  • Your goal was to achieve local or institutional change rather than to test a research hypothesis for generalizable knowledge.

These abstracts should contain the following sections: 

  • ​Purpose (Why did you start?): Briefly describe the care or service delivery problem being addressed, the local context, the desired improvement, and the aim statement. Include any relevant baseline data.
  • ​Methods (What did you do?): Outline the setting, how the problem was selected, team formation, planning and implementation of the intervention(s) and implementation, and the data collected. Include how measures were defined and tracked.
  • ​Results (What did you find?): Describe what happened during implementation (sequence of events, PDSA cycles [how the interventions and implementation evolved]), number of participants at key points), and success of implementation. Present data as run charts when appropriate. Describe contextual factors that may have impacted results (such as resources, staffing, organizational culture).
  • ​Discussion (What does it mean?): Summarize key findings, particularly strengths, compare to findings of others, limitations, next steps.

Option 3: Program Description Abstracts 

Best suited for: Descriptions of innovative programs, activities, or initiatives that address specific needs in clinical care, public health, or health systems in unique or effective ways.

Program Description Abstracts provide an opportunity to share new, adapted, and/or replicable programs that address a specific gap or challenge. These abstracts emphasize program development and implementation, and should include some evaluation component, even if final results/formal evaluation are not yet available. These may include service delivery innovations, training or mentorship programs, advocacy initiatives, piloting a new tool, or other organized programs addressing specific health needs. The focus should be on implementation and real-world outcomes. (Unlike QI Abstracts, which focus on systematic performance improvement using defined QI methods (e.g., PDSA cycles), Program Description Abstracts emphasize implementation and practical insights from real-world experiences, regardless of whether QI tools were used.)

Use this category if:

  • Your project describes the design and implementation a program or initiative, along with some evaluation measures
  • The project was not conducted as formal research or QI but includes thoughtful analysis of results and lessons learned.
  • You want to share best practices and practical insights that could inform similar efforts in other settings.
  • The focus is on program design, implementation, and early impact, rather than a measurable improvement aim or iterative testing.

These abstracts should contain the following sections: 

  • ​Background: Describe the problem or gap the program addresses. What was the context, and why was this program needed? Clearly state the overall purpose and objectives of the program.
  • ​Description: Provide enough detail about the program’s structure, target population, activities/interventions, and implementation process so that someone else could replicate the program in a similar setting. Include key components such as resources required, team roles, and any adaptations made for the specific context.
  • ​Evaluation and outcomes: Describe how the program’s effectiveness was measured and what impact it had on the target population, What was the intended outcome of the program? How were data collected and analyzed? What were the key findings? While formal outcome data may still be emerging, abstracts should include at least some evaluation measures (e.g., participant feedback, early results, reach, process data, or short-term indicators).
  • Lessons learned: Interpret the outcomes. Did you achieve your objectives? Did the program, activity, project adequately address the identified need? Share successes, challenges, and key takeaways. What insights did you gain from implementation? Were there unexpected results? What might others need to know to replicate or adapt your approach? What were the program’s strengths and limitations?
  • Next Steps: Explain the significance of your findings and/or outcomes of the program, activity, project towards strengthening care.  Describe future directions of the efforts. Discuss plans for future implementation, improvement, scale-up, or continued evaluation. What resources are needed? Could this program be useful in other settings?