General Guidelines

The material must not have been published online or in print before submission of the abstract. Simultaneous submission of the same abstract to other meetings is permitted.

The submitting author will be advised of the results of the peer review. It is the responsibility of the submitting author to advise other team members of the result.

Each abstract must have one author as the presenter. Multiple presenters are not permitted. The presenting author must register for and attend the program if their abstract is accepted for oral and/or poster presentation.  

An individual will not be accepted to orally present more than two abstracts at SHSA 2025.  

If an abstract is chosen for an oral presentation, a Declaration of Conflict-of-Interest Statement (DCOI) will be required from the presenting author. Presenters must disclose any financial relationships in any amount that they may have or had with all ineligible companies within the last 24 months. Ineligible companies are those whose primary business is producing, marketing, selling, reselling, or distributing healthcare products used by or on patients. Presenters may not be employees and/or owners of an ineligible company.

Late-breaking abstracts will only be accepted for Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trial data. Should you wish to submit a late-breaking abstract, please contact us for access to the submission portal.

The SHSA Planning Committee intends to publish all abstracts in Dermatology & Therapy in conjunction with the meeting. During the submission process, submitters will be asked to confirm their agreement to this publication.

Copyright Information: An abstract supplement with accepted SHSA abstracts will be published in Dermatology and Therapy. This will be an open access article published under a CC BY-NC licence (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial 4.0 International licence). Under Creative Commons licences, authors retain copyright of their articles.

Important Dates

Specific Guidelines

Abstracts are recommended to align with the HS Foundation’s Research Roadmap to support the transformation of healthcare in Hidradenitis Suppurativa.  

All abstracts should be no more than 300 words in length, not including title or authors. Abstracts will only be accepted in English.

Abstract titles should be brief – a maximum of 100 characters. Titles should be in upper and lower case, NOT ALL CAPITALS.

There is no limit on the number of authors on any abstract.

Authors will be asked to categorize their abstract by topic. The options are:

• Basic Science, Translational Research, Pathogenesis & Genetics;
• Epidemiology and Comorbidities;
• Medical & Surgical Treatments (Clinical studies or trials that evaluate or compare medical therapies, surgery, devices, or other interventions for the treatment of HS);
• Patient-Centered Care, Delivery, and Access to Care, Health-Related Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Outcomes;
• Case Report & Case Series (Only considered for poster presentation) 
  Authors should indicate if they wish to present an oral or poster presentation. Those selecting oral will be offered a poster if an oral presentation is not possible. Those selecting poster may not be considered for oral presentation.

Each abstract should follow the following structure:

• Background: Summary of the rationale for the work.
• Objective: Clearly state the purpose of the work.
• Method: Describe the procedures/activities or methodology used to conduct your work. Please provide specific Information about subject characteristics or healthcare setting, where relevant.
• Results: Summarize key findings or important results that you wish to share with colleagues in a clear and concise manner. Where results warrant, provide reasonable conclusions that relate back to the study purpose/objectives.  
  Discussion: Clearly state how the outcomes and potential applications are pertinent to the audience. 
   

Evaluation Criteria

Originality

How original is the concept presented in the abstract, or how original is the new approach to an old problem? Is this a novel approach to the question? Is this a novel analysis? 

Importance & Contribution/ Significance & Interest to the Audience/ Scientific Merit
How significant is the abstract relative to its subject area (such as increasing the understanding of a disease process, improving the diagnosis or treatment of a disease condition, or affecting a care process)? Will the study enhance clinical, research, or educational behaviors with novel information? Will the study improve HS outcomes? Will the study attract attention and interest from the audience?

Experimental Design

How appropriate is the research design used to address the stated research objectives (including the validity and application of statistical measures used, if applicable)? Are the techniques sufficient/appropriate/superfluous? Are multiple confounding variables present that could weaken the study’s conclusions? Does the design lead to the researcher's conclusions?

Overall Quality/Presentation

What is the overall quality of the abstract presentation in terms of organization, ability to engage the reader and hold interest, and convey conclusions in a meaningful way? How well written is the abstract (for example, correctness of spelling and free of significant grammatical problems)?

Abstract Review Committee