Background: Research knowledge is dispersed among peers commonly via three modes of presentation in conferences – workshop, oral presentation, and poster presentation. Each mode of presentation has certain advantages and disadvantages.Aim: The aim of this study was to explore medical professionals' perspectives on advantages and disadvantages of poster presentation in scientific conferences.Materials and Methods: A pretested questionnaire was used as the survey instrument. The instrument was composed of eight statements with 5-point Likert-type response option. A cross-sectional, online survey (on Google Forms) was conducted among medical professionals who participated in conferences where posters were presented for research presentation. Responses were expressed in percentages and compared by Chi-square test with α = 0.05.Results: Survey response rate was 29.06% ([247/850] × 100). The best feature of poster presentation was the option to re-read the paper (98.78%) followed by the facility of face-to-face interaction with authors (95.15%) and facility to read the paper of interest only (93.12%). Highest equivocal opinion was received (42.92%) for applicability of poster in presentation of in-depth information about the research.Conclusion: This study revealed that preference of poster presentation is mostly due to facility of reading the paper of interest only and option to re-read according to necessity. Face-to-face interaction with researcher was another major advantage of poster as a presentation medium. Hence, an option for presenting oral papers as posters, presented by a coauthor, may be considered for wide dispersion of research knowledge.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mondal et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: