REVIEWER RECOMMENDATIONS

Relevance to the main themes of the conference and the 9 pillars of integrated care is essential, when considering your scores, please ask yourself, is this paper a demonstration of integrated care as set out in the 9 pillars of integrated care and does this paper compliment the themes of the conference?

Where relevant, submissions must demonstrate active stakeholder involvement in either or all of design, implementation and evaluation. This can include stakeholders such as the workforce and community organizations, patients and care givers.

When evaluating the paper ask yourself the following questions:
a) Is the question or issue clearly stated?
b) Is the significance of the work clearly stated? =
c) Is the topic of scientific, methodological or theoretical importance?
d) Is the paper timely in terms of current issues of interest in the field of integrated care?
e) If relevant, are the method, data collection, and analysis procedures well-designed and appropriate to the question addressed? Is the conceptual framework coherent? If relevant, is the theoretical analysis well-argued?
f) Is the work original? Does it present new data (if relevant)? Is it evidence-based?

It is important that the work is completed, or does it show very strong promise of being completed in time for the conference?
a) For research papers, analyses should generally be complete. Submissions that only promise future data analyses in time for the meeting will not be considered.
b) For practical papers, please consider how mature the project, programme or service is and give consideration to those that can demonstrate evaluation and evidence-based results.

Assuming the principle of inclusiveness, reviewers are asked to consider whether the format sought by the author would in fact be the most appropriate (perhaps a submission would be more appropriate to a poster or oral presentation, or vice versa – please indicate the more appropriate format).

English must be passable, and sometimes the offer of a poster might be a better option where this is an issue.

Posters that are a pure literature review should be rejected, with the exception of low resourced countries who are developing their research. Meta-analysis is highly appreciated.

Scientific measures are most important. However, the reviewer should consider the research conditions in particular countries. We would like to encourage colleagues from developing countries to present at the conference even if their financial and material conditions are complicated, we would like to find them a place on the program.

REVIEW QUESTIONS