Congratulations to the 2024 iBEST Trainee Poster Competition top five
This year’s poster competition was open to undergraduate, masters, PhD and postdoctoral trainees. A total of 55 submissions were presented to judges at the iBEST Symposium.
Alex D’Ippolito, Tri-modal Confocal Microscope for Breast and Thyroid Cancer Detection, supervisor: Dr. Alexandre Douplik
Céline Dubroy-McArdle, Automatic Segmentation of Metastatic Brain Tumours using Magnetization Transfer Contrast, supervisor: Dr. Dafna Sussman
Brock Hoard, The L33P polymorphism of integrin β3 PSI domain enhances its thiol isomerase activity and upregulates the coagulation cascade, supervisor: Dr. Heyu Ni
Farshad Moradi Kashkooli, Ultrasound-Mediated Nano-Drug Delivery System to Enhance Cancer Treatment Efficacy: An In Vitro Study, supervisor: Dr. Michael Kolios
Vivian Tan, Evaluating the Mechanical Properties of Synthetic Tissue-Mimicking Materials for Clinical Applications, supervisor: Dr. Owais Khan
2024 Symposium Trainee Poster Competition
Guidelines/Criteria for Evaluating Posters
Posters will be judged based on the following criteria:
(1) Overall Visual:
- Are the components of the poster balanced and legible across the space?
- Do the findings support the conclusions?
(2) Overall Oral:
- Did the presenter sufficiently explain the poster and answer questions?
- Did the presenter speak clearly and distinctly and show enthusiasm about their topic?
(3) Overall Impact:
- Does this research have the potential to make a novel contribution to the field?
- Does the presenter understand the importance of this potential contribution?
- Does the presenter indicate they understand how this research fits into the overall field?
Scoring Criteria:
| Overall Impact or Criterion Strength | Score | Descriptor |
| Low | 1-2 | Very Poor |
| 3-4 | Poor | |
| 5-6 | Marginal | |
| Medium | 7-8 | Fair |
| 9-10 | Satisfactory | |
| 11-12 | Average | |
| 13-14 | Good | |
| High | 15-16 | Very Good |
| 17-18 | Excellent | |
| 19-20 | Exceptional |
Oral Presentation Selection Criteria
Trainees will be selected for oral presentations based on the following criteria in advance of the iBEST Symposium:
(1) Clarity and Organization of Presentation
- Is the abstract well-written and clear, and does it accurately summarize the key aspects of the research?
- Is the 3-slide presentation logically organized, with a clear introduction, research methodology/results and conclusion?
- Are the visuals, graphs and other materials used in the presentation clear and relevant, and do they enhance the understanding of the research?
(2) Research Quality and Rigor
- Are the research design and methodology appropriate and well-explained?
- Is the data collection and analysis rigorous and suitable for the research questions/hypotheses?
- Are the conclusions drawn from the research supported by the data and analysis?
(3) Impact and Application
- Does the research have the potential to significantly impact the field or society or address a pressing challenge?
- Are there clear applications or implications of the research findings for practice, policy or further research?
Scoring Criteria:
| Overall Impact or Criterion Strength | Score | Descriptor |
| Low | 1-2 | Very Poor |
| 3-4 | Poor | |
| 5-6 | Marginal | |
| Medium | 7-8 | Fair |
| 9-10 | Satisfactory | |
| 11-12 | Average | |
| 13-14 | Good | |
| High | 15-16 | Very Good |
| 17-18 | Excellent | |
| 19-20 | Exceptional |
View Past iBEST Symposia
© 2023 iBEST | Institute for Biomedical Engineering, Science and Technology