AMIA 2023 Annual Symposium Call for Participation

Papers from all areas of biomedical informatics will be considered, with particular emphasis on those that align with the content themes for the AMIA 2022 Annual Symposium. Authors of accepted papers will have 18 minutes to present their work at the symposium including any question and answer period.

Pre-print Policy: Papers must not be in press or under consideration for presentation or publication elsewhere. However, authors retain the right to make a pre-print version of the paper available on recognized preprint servers (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv, PeerJ preprints, etc.) or personal/employer websites prior to acceptance for publication

Papers must be formatted to be 5-10 pages (including all tables, figures, references, and acknowledgements (U.S. Letter; 8.5 x 11 inch) in length and include:

• The names, academic degree(s), affiliations, and locations (city, state, and country, if international) of all authors;
• An abstract of 125-150 words summarizing the submission, which should also be entered into the online submission form;
• Optional illustrations (figures or tables).

Students are invited to submit papers that describe complete or nearly complete research or development efforts in informatics which were primarily carried out by the student. All designated student papers follow the paper format requirements above, and they will first be reviewed through the standard review process, along with all other submitted papers. Student papers that are accepted will be presented in a regular paper session and included in the Annual Symposium Proceedings. Papers can only be submitted as a student paper or a regular paper, not both.

In addition, all accepted student papers will be referred to the Student Paper Advisory Committee (SPAC) for consideration for the Student Paper Competition. Eight student papers will be selected by the SPAC as finalists for the award competition and these eight papers will be presented at a special session. The eight finalist papers will be presented twice during the symposium (i.e., once in the Student Paper Competition session and once in a regular scientific session). It is up to the submitting student to ensure that their paper is correctly identified as a student paper proposal.

Individuals, who as of March 21, 2023, are enrolled in a degree granting program or in an academic program, such as a medical residency or a post-doctoral fellowship, are eligible to enter a paper into the Student Paper Competition. Work performed as part of a large, collaborative effort is acceptable; however, the student paper will be judged on the student’s specific contributions to the project, which must be clearly delineated. Only individual students, not groups, may submit papers for consideration in the Student Paper Competition. Preparation of a manuscript must be entirely the work of the student. Entries from international students are encouraged.

In addition meeting the standard requirements of Papers, as described, Student Papers submitted for consideration in the Student Paper Competition must provide the following information from each student:

• The name and address of the training program;
• Clear identification of the primary advisor of the student submitting the paper;
• All co-authors and a description of each author's contribution to the work;
• An attestation of the student's contribution to the manuscript with respect to the following items: (a) The text of the manuscript itself; (b) The data collected for any analysis; (c) The actual data analysis; (d) The review of the literature; (e) If a system was developed, the role of the student in the coding/development of the system; and (f) The evaluation of the results and the formation of the conclusion;
• The student will be asked to upload a PDF of the attestation letter signed by their primary advisor confirming items a-f above.

Multiple first authors: Student Paper submissions typically have a single first author. In cases where two or more authors are designated as co-first authors, the submission should indicate which one individual will be considered as the potential nominee for student paper competition, and this author’s name should be the first in the order.

The podium abstract format allows for the presentation of cutting-edge unpublished research that the author wishes to reserve publication rights for future consideration or outstanding work previously published in a peer-reviewed journal. Priority will be given to work that has not previously been unpublished or disseminated in other forums. Authors of accepted podium abstracts will have up to 18 minutes to present their work at the symposium including any questions and discussion.

Abstracts will NOT be indexed in MEDLINE, enabling authors to submit their best work that is destined for future journal publication. Contributions may also consist of abstracts based on work published in peer-reviewed journals in the last year (i.e., publication after March 2022); however, works published as proceedings for other conferences will not be accepted. Citation of the previous work is required.

Submissions must be submitted as a two-page (including all tables, figures, references, and acknowledgements) (U.S. Letter; 8.5 x 11 inch) document and include:

• The names, academic degree(s), affiliations, and locations (city, state, and country, if international) of all authors;
• A structured abstract must be submitted that includes the following sections:
  • Introduction – A short background and objective(s) of the study;
  • Methods – Design, setting (if appropriate), patients or participants (if appropriate), interventions (if appropriate), and main outcome measurement;
  • Results – Key findings;
  • Discussion – Key Conclusions with direct reference to the foundational advancement or biomedical application of the work;
  • Optional illustrations (figures or tables);
  • References.

In addition, all podium abstract submissions must have a brief (50-75 words) abstract. The abstract paragraph does NOT have to be part of the document but must be entered on the submission website in the Abstract box on the online submission form.

Posters are the preferred format for presenting preliminary research or results of small-scale studies, illustrating and discussing innovative systems and services, describing experimental and in-practice projects and programs, reporting experiences with educational programs, and other dimensions of biomedical and health informatics. The poster sessions have been an increasingly vibrant and popular component of the symposium, offering direct access to the authors in a way not possible through podium presentations. Each accepted poster is displayed during one of the 90-minute poster sessions at the symposium. At least one author must be present at the poster session. Posters will not be indexed in MEDLINE.

Posters must reflect new work, and not reflect work that is in press or previously published elsewhere.

Your uploaded poster manuscript file must be submitted as a one-page (including all tables, figures, references, and acknowledgements) (U.S. Letter; 8.5 x 11 inch) document and include:

• The names, academic degree(s), affiliations, and locations (city, state, and country, if international) of all authors;
• A description of the problem addressed and specific purposes of the system, service, or project; or, in the case of original research, an overview of the methodology, evaluation results, and conclusions;
• Optional illustrations (figures or tables), which must fit in the one-page limit;
• References, if applicable.

All poster submissions must have a brief (50-75 words) abstract. The abstract paragraph does NOT have to be part of the document but must be entered on the submission website in the Abstract box on the online submission form. (Please DO NOT copy and paste the entire one-page document into that box).

Panel sessions are designed to present an integrated set of perspectives or experience on a current topic in clinical research informatics. Panel topics may be on a specific aspect of theory, application, policy, trends, or experience pertaining to any aspect of clinical research informatics, or may provide interdisciplinary viewpoints that cut across traditional themes.

Panel submissions and final presentations should demonstrate collective reflection and integration of the content presented by each of the panelists, or offer engaged forms of dialogue and interaction between panelists and audience. Scholarly debate among presenters is encouraged, as are panels that incorporate science, practice, and policy themes to improve the conduct of clinical and translational research.

Panels should be limited to four participants and a moderator, and should be timed to allow one-third to one-half of the session for audience participation. Panel sessions are 90-minutes. An individual may be the primary organizer of only one panel and may not participate on more than two panels total.

The uploaded panel manuscript file must not exceed a maximum of three pages (including all tables, figures, references, and acknowledgements) (U.S. Letter; 8.5 x 11 inch) and include:

• The names, academic degree(s), affiliations, and locations (city, state, and country, if international) of the panel organizer and all participants;
• An abstract of 125 -150 words, describing the panel and its learning objectives, which should also be entered into a text box at the beginning of the online form to be used in the online program;
• A general description of the panel and the issue(s) that will be examined and a brief description of each panelist's presentation;
• An explanation why the topic of this panel is timely, urgent, needed, or attention grabbing is required with a discussion of anticipated audience;
• A list of discussion questions to enhance audience participation;
• A statement from the panel organizer that all participants have agreed to take part on the panel.

Informatics debate provides conference participants with the opportunity to use debate as a platform for presenting the pros and cons of a biomedical informatics issue. Debates can cover a wide range of topics including ethical, technology, policy, research, or otherwise-focused debates with specific implications for health informatics.

Informatics debate should be limited to four participants and a moderator, and they should be timed to allow for audience participation, including pre- and post-debate assessment of agreement with the debate resolutions. A good debate often has two presenters who are presenting pros and two presenters presenting cons regarding a selected biomedical issue. There will be three 30-minute debates in a 90-minute session. To encourage a spread of participants in debates, each individual is limited to participating in up to one debate in total (either as a participant or primary organizer).

The uploaded debate manuscript file must not exceed a maximum of three pages (including all tables, figures, references, and acknowledgements) (U.S. Letter; 8.5 x 11 inch) and include:

• The names, academic degree(s), affiliations, and locations (city, state, and country, if international) of the panel organizer and all participants;
• An abstract of 150 words, describing the informatics debate and its learning objectives, which should also be entered into a text box at the beginning of the online form to be used in the online program;
• A general description of the subject of the informatics debate;
• Two or more short statements, each clearly descripting one of the positions that will be examined;
• An explanation why the topic of this informatics debate is timely and relevant to the AMIA audience;
• A description of how the audience will be engaged in the debate;
• A description of the order in which presenter will describe the positions, indicating which presenter will present and support which position;
• A statement from the debate organizer that all participants have agreed to take part in the debate.

Systems demonstrations illustrate one or more aspects of a leading-edge system that is in use, under development, or at a testing or prototype stage. Each demonstration is 30 minutes long, including any questions and discussion.

Your uploaded systems demonstration manuscript file must be submitted as a one-page (including all tables, figures, references, and acknowledgements) (U.S. Letter; 8.5 x 11 inch) document and must include:

• The names, academic degree(s), affiliations, and locations (city, state, and country, if
• An abstract of 50-75 words summarizing the proposal, which will also be entered into a text box at the beginning of the online form to be used in the online program;
• A description of the specific purposes of the system, service, or project; the problems in health care practice, biomedicine, or research in informatics that it is designed to address; and the purpose or features of the system, service, or project that make it
• A statement of the degree to which the system or service has been deployed, as of the date of submitting the proposal.

The abstract paragraph does NOT have to be part of the document but must be entered on the submission website in the Abstract box on the online submission form. (Please DO NOT copy and paste the entire one-page document into that box).

Half-day (3-hour) and full-day (6-hour) workshops are dedicated to in-depth treatment and collaborative discussion of special topics and interests of relevance to the broad biomedical informatics community.

These workshops are divided into two categories:

1. Instructional Workshops, focusing on knowledge base and competency development by presenters.
2. Collaborative Workshops, intended to support the creation and ongoing activities of communities-of-practice within AMIA.

Instructional workshops should have no more than five presenters while the collaborative workshops should have no more than seven presenters.

Instructional Workshops

Instructional Workshops are limited to three hours in length and should include a combination of didactic and interactive content delivery, as well as participant interaction. Such workshops should be designed to address the needs and interests of individuals at all levels of experience relative to the selected topic area(s) and be led by individuals with appropriate subject matter expertise. The SPC encourages proposals that will bring together individuals with similar or different roles in developing, implementing, or using informatics in practice, management, education, research, or policy. Further, the SPC seeks a balance between workshops that address essential core informatics theory and principles, with those that address practical applications, current issues, and emerging trends and developments in informatics, aligned with overall meeting themes.

Collaborative Workshops

Collaborative Workshops may be either three or six hours in length, and are intended to encourage participation and collaboration using mechanisms such as discussion forums (e.g., shorter didactic presentations or panels followed by group discussions), research forums (e.g., presentations and discussions related to scientific advancements in a targeted areas of informatics innovation and practice), or a challenge/competition (e.g., individual or group submissions addressing a specific topic or scientific/technical challenge).

Submission Details

Individuals submitting either type of workshop proposal are encouraged to coordinate their activities and submissions with one or more AMIA Working Groups (WGs) as a means of raising the profile of WGs and their constituents at the Annual Symposium.

The SPC may ask individuals proposing thematically similar workshops in an independent manner to integrate their submissions prior to acceptance.

Individuals proposing workshops should be available to present on Saturday, November 11 or Sunday, November 12 and should confirm their availability on each of those days.

Workshop proposals must not exceed a maximum of four pages (U.S. Letter; 8.5 x 11 inch) in length and include the following information:

• A descriptive title for the workshop;
• An indication of the workshop type (i.e., instructional or collaborative) and suggested length for collaborative workshop proposals (3 or 6 hours);
• The names, academic degree(s), affiliations, and locations (city, state/province, and country, if international) of all workshop faculty;
• A summary of 250 to 300 words that describes the content of the workshop;
• An outline of topics to be covered and description of interactive components of the workshop;
• Specific educational objectives or outcomes that participants can expect to achieve
• A description of who should attend (e.g., clinicians, educators, leaders in healthcare or other organizations, researchers, policy makers, IT professionals);
• A description of prerequisites knowledge that participant should have, if any
• Indicate if the workshop instructional level is introductory, intermediate, or advance or a
• Experience of the workshop instructors/leaders in in the targeted content areas;
• If applicable, an indication of WG affiliations for the workshop (including the names of the individuals within each WG providing a formal endorsement of the submission);
• A list of conferences where this workshop has been previously presented, including past AMIA meetings.

Annual Symposium Workshop Review Process

Workshop proposals (Instructional and Collaborative) for the AMIA Annual Symposium are reviewed by a combination of the Education Committee and the Working Group Steering Committee (WGSC). It is the SPC’s view that the Education Committee is best suited to provide meaningful assessment of Instructional Workshops. Similarly, as Collaborative Workshops historically originated from AMIA Working Groups, we view the WGSC as best suited to review Collaborative Workshop proposals.

The Education Committee Chair will act as an SPC member assigning Instructional Workshop proposals to Education Committee members for review. The WGSC chair will act as an SPC member assigning Collaborative Workshop proposals to WGSC members for review. After review, the two committee chairs will evaluate the combined Workshop proposals to identify the highest ranked proposals while ensuring a mix of Instructional and Collaborative Workshops. They will propose a draft set of recommendations and a program of accepted Workshops to the SPC. The next step of the process is a discussion between the SPC Leadership, Education Committee Chair, and WGSC Chair to understand the results of the Workshop review. The final decision for all workshops rests with the SPC Chair in consultation with the SPC Vice Chairs. All proposals, regardless of Working Group affiliation, will be reviewed and ranked in this manner.

The SPC’s goal is to have the highest quality content for the Annual Symposium Workshops. We also recognize the value of Working Group sponsored/affiliated proposals and wish to support their work at the Annual Symposium. Accordingly, for proposals that are equally ranked and in accordance with prior review practice, preference will be given to the Working Group affiliated submission. The SPC requests that Working Group’s closely monitor “official” contributions to support the SPC’s goal of receiving the highest quality contributions. This step is particularly important since there is a finite amount of programmatic space.  Immediately following the submission deadline, the AMIA staff will coordinate with the Working Groups Chair to review and approve WG-designated contributions to confirm the submission as an “official” contribution.

An opportunity for submissions demonstrating state-of-the-art approaches and best practices in education, research, training and workforce development. This thematic focus includes work addressing curricular and pedagogical challenges within academic informatics across a spectrum of education settings including high school, undergraduate, graduate level, postgraduate, and continuing professional education. The goal is to support the growth of programs, professionals, and the learners they educate by solving challenges and strengthening the academic informatics community.

Applications of informatics in the healthcare setting, to improve the processes and outcomes of healthcare for patients and populations. Findings related to the design, development, and implementation and maintenance of state-of-the-art clinical systems, including electronic health records, standards and interoperability, clinical decision support, and effects on clinical quality, safety, and patient outcomes, are considered to be part of this programmatic theme.

The use of informatics in the discovery and management of new knowledge relating to health and disease. It includes management of information related to clinical trials and also involves informatics related to secondary research use of clinical data. Clinical research informatics and translational bioinformatics are the primary domains related to informatics activities to support translational research.

Devoted to informatics focusing on multiple consumer or patient views. These include patient-focused informatics, health literacy and consumer education. The focus is on information structures and processes that empower consumers to manage their own health – for example health information literacy, consumer-friendly language, personal health records, mHealth, and Internet-based strategies and resources. The shift in this view of informatics analyzes consumers' needs for information; studies and implements methods for making information accessible to consumers; and models and integrates consumers' preferences into health information systems. Consumer informatics stands at the crossroads of other disciplines, such as nursing informatics, public health, health promotion, health education, library science, and communication science.

Applications of informatics in areas of public or population health, including surveillance, prevention, preparedness, and health promotion. The scope of public health is broad, focusing on the health of people and communities where they live, learn, work and play. Informatics applied to public health can therefore take many forms, including interoperable information systems to analyze data for biosurveillance, inform outbreak management in a community, provide immunization decision support, evaluate public health programs, model the spread of disease, and create understanding into the epidemiology of disease.

The development of storage, analytic, and interpretive methods to optimize the transformation of increasingly voluminous biomedical data, and genomic data, into proactive, predictive, preventive, and participatory health. Translational bioinformatics includes research on the development of novel techniques for the integration of biological and clinical data and the evolution of clinical informatics methodology to encompass biological observations. The end product of translational bioinformatics is newly found knowledge from these integrative efforts that can be disseminated to a variety of stakeholders, including biomedical scientists, clinicians, and patients.

The Foundations track focuses on the conceptual and methodological advances that underpin the spectrum of biomedical informatics innovation. Contributions in this track should include work that presents progress in the generating, structuring, processing, managing, and analysis of biomedical and health information. Overall priority areas include the description and demonstration of methodologies that show promise in advancing the understanding and support of research and education in biological, clinical, and public health contexts.

The Applications track focuses on innovations in the design, technology, implementation, use, and evaluation of information systems and knowledge resources across the full spectrum of healthcare - in acute, ambulatory, and chronic care settings, public health departments, libraries, educational centers, and homes. Contributions to this track should emphasize applications that work in the real world to solve problems that impact or characterize health and well-being.

The Policy track focuses on informatics-relevant policies, policy recommendations, and policy evaluations, as well as the dependencies between informatics innovations and informatics policy. Priority will be given to those submissions that discuss informatics topics that may have either been influenced by policy decisions (e.g., Meaningful Use) or that may impact policy (e.g., 21st Century Cures Act). Contributions in this track should clearly identify policy implications and the role played by innovative informatics methodology.

After participating in this session, the learner should be better able to:

• Understand the current issues in drug-allergy alerting systems, including high alert rate and low alert sensitivity, and be able to discuss and recommend several approaches to reducing drug-allergy alert burden in the electronic health records systems.
• Learn challenges and possible solutions in creating and maintaining data elements for electronic health record systems across different clinical settings.
• Learn the quality of clinical documents generated by speech recognition technology and understand errors in dictated clinical documents at different processing stages and their potential impact in patient care.
• Formulate an approach to adoption of health information technology for the small physician group practice. (From the AMA)

After participating in this session, the learner should be better able to:

• Define the healthcare protocol for the treatment and prevention of Stage III and IV pressure ulcers and apply to your own practice.
  • Too many verbs. An improved learning objective would be (From the Colorado Foundation for Medical Care):
  • “1) Define the healthcare protocol for the treatment of Stage III and IV pressure ulcers;  2) Define the healthcare protocol for the prevention of Stage III and IV pressure ulcers; and 3) Apply this knowledge to their own practice.”
• Explain and discuss current initiatives and effective modalities to prevent incidence of complications such as infection or wrong-sided block.
  • This is a teaching objective. A learning objective on the same topic would be (From Winthrop University Hospital):
  • “Prevent incidence of complications such as infection or wrong-sided block using current initiatives and effective modalities.”
• Become familiar with common eye problems.
  • The outcome is not measurable, there is no action the learner can take, and there is no context regarding the patient’s condition. Better learning objective (From the AAFP):
  • “Screen for eye conditions commonly associated with type 2 diabetes.”