Blog – How to Write a Powerful Conference Abstract

It’s conference season! Just kidding – it’s never not conference season. Whether it’s your first time submitting to a conference, or your hundredth, you’ll know that a strong abstract is key to getting on the programme. However, when space is limited, and competition plentiful, how do you make yours stand out?

Those of us with some experience under our belts will know that a good abstract is one that isn’t just summarising your study, it’s the first impression, perhaps easier thought of as a pitch, as it is sometimes the difference between presenting your work or watching your colleagues from the sidelines. So, how do you write one like this? What is the difference between a simple summary and an attention-grabbing pitch? Well, in this blog post I will discuss just that, and hopefully leave you with a better understanding of how to position your research in this context.

Know your audience

This might seem obvious, but it’s a crucial starting point. Most labs have their go-to conferences – the ones seen as prestigious and worth submitting to. That’s great, but what if you’ve never been? With conferences happening seemingly every other week, it’s easy to spread yourself too thin. Local events offer different perks from international ones (not to mention the cost factor), so knowing where to focus your efforts is key. The best way to figure this out? Speak to your colleagues and supervisors – they’ll have valuable insights on which conferences are worth your time and how to make the most of them.

Also, who will be attending the conference? The same study can lead to a very different abstract depending on the audience you’re talking to. For example, a conference where most people have specialist knowledge in your methods will have a greater baseline understanding of that specific aspect of your abstract and study, and therefore you can assume more knowledge in that part, and perhaps less on the clinical applicability, for example.  On the flipside though, they may also have more specific queries related to your methods, so it can sometimes be a difficult line to draw – again, discussions with (and previous examples from) your colleagues can be a huge help here.

Keep in mind, you’re writing for two audiences: the reviewers deciding whether or not you’ll make it on the programme, and the people who are choosing which session to attend. You have to win over both.

Know what they want

As well as the above things that they want, what do they want from your abstract itself? This aspect is critical to understand and will contribute significantly to making or breaking your submission. So, before you start writing, make sure you know what the conference itself is looking for – some prioritise groundbreaking results, others methodology or real-world impact. Then you need to make sure you know what they want from the structure – this should be given in the submission guidelines, alongside some themes. In my field at least, pretty much every abstract is going to require a similar wordcount (150 – 450 words (although as you may have immediately recognised, you’re going to write something very different at these two extremes)) and requested details, for example ‘background’, ‘methods’, ‘results’, and ‘conclusions’. These might be worded slightly differently, or merged together, and each may have its own separate wordcount, but you can essentially parse out to those ideas in pretty much every case.

Brevity, brevity, brevity

Every word counts. Every single one. I am a verbose human being, I like to add information for flourish or emphasis, even if it is unnecessary (just check out all of these parentheses, or the title where I giggled to myself when I wrote ‘brevity’ three times). Don’t be me – every word you use should facilitate the conveyance of information that is vital to the story of your work.

Avoid jargon (or more realistically, define your jargon)

Ah, this one is a real bugbear of mine. There is nothing more frustrating than sitting through a talk and feeling completely lost within the first few minutes, just because no one has thought to explain their terminology. Just because something is everyday language in your lab, doesn’t mean it will land with anyone else. It might not even land within the same lab! In short, what’s obvious to you might be completely baffling to someone in another part of your field.

To be clear, it isn’t about dumbing things down – it is just making sure that people can actually follow what you’re saying. What’s the point in all that prep to only lose your audience at the critical moment? Taking the time to quickly explain or use a simpler phrase can make all the difference, after all, the aim is for the whole room to stay with you – not just the handful who speak your particular academic dialect.

Review, refine, and proofread

Once you’ve got a draft, you don’t need to rush to submit it (even if you’re very close to the deadline for submission, if you’re one of those people who likes to submit a piece of work that you started based on a whim less than a week before the deadline) – even taking five minutes can prevent silly errors. Take a step back, read it out loud if you need to, and confirm – does it make sense? Is it true to the story of your work? Is everything in there pulling its weight?

Trim any fluff, check the wordcount, tighten the phrasing, make sure the flow makes sense. If you can, finding someone outside your research area to read it can be really helpful. If they follow it, fantastic. But if not, it is better to fix it now than have it be turned down.

While you’re at it, take time to proofread too. Because nothing says “I’m a serious researcher” like writing ‘imagining’ rather than ‘imaging’ (something I actually did in my PhD application).

Submission logistics matter

After all that hard work, don’t let the admin trip you up. Submission portals can be tricky—character limits, formatting issues, and required headings. Double-check the guidelines, keep an eye on space counts, and make sure you’re not cut off mid-sentence if you copy and paste (those sneaky spaces can ruin your day). And always save a copy before submitting. It’s not glamorous, but it’s crucial.

Common mistakes to avoid

Avoid being too vague or too detailed – keep it clear and focused. Stick to the submission guidelines, as ignoring them can lead to rejection. Don’t overhype results or make unsupported claims; be honest about what your data actually shows.

Writing an abstract that stands out isn’t just about what you say, but how you say it. By keeping your audience in mind, being clear and concise, and following all the necessary steps, you’ll give yourself the best chance of success. Take the time to really refine your abstract – it’s your first opportunity to make an impression. With a bit of care and attention, you’ll be well on your way to presenting your research at the next big conference.

Jodi Watt

Author

Dr Jodi Watt is a Postdoctoral Researcher at University of Glasgow. Jodi’s academic interests are in both healthy ageing and neurodegenerative diseases of older age, and they are currently working on drug repurposing for dementia. Previously they worked on understanding structural, metabolic and physiological brain changes with age, as measured using magnetic resonance imaging. As a queer and neurodiverse person, Jodi is also incredibly interested in improving diversity and inclusion practices both within and outside of the academic context.

Find Jodi on LinkedIn