BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The presentation of scientific posters gives young scientists the opportunity to present their data in the setting of a medical congress. In preparation of the organization of the 116th Congress of the German Society of Internal Medicine (DGIM) 2010, the authors evaluated the poster rounds at the 115th Congress of the DGIM 2009 by using a questionnaire that was given to poster presenters, poster chairmen, and visitors. The authors sought to receive an instructive criticism for the organization in 2010. METHODS: Distribution of questionnaires containing ten questions with preformulated response options and an additional field for further comments to all presenters, chairmen, and visitors of the poster rounds during the 115th Congress of the DGIM (April 2009). RESULTS: 159 questionnaires were returned and evaluated. Almost all respondents quoted the poster presentation as being important for their scientific work (98%). In general, they were satisfied with the discussion at the poster rounds (83%). The amount of posters within one round was criticized by 41%, as was the inadequate adherence to time constraints and time frame and room conditions themselves. CONCLUSION: The poster exhibition of the 115th Congress of the DGIM 2009 was evaluated positively by most of the respondents to the survey. Nevertheless, helpful hints were retrieved as how to further improve poster rounds. They should be respected when planning the exhibition at the congress in 2010.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The presentation of scientific posters gives young scientists the opportunity to present their data in the setting of a medical congress. In preparation of the organization of the 116th Congress of the German Society of Internal Medicine (DGIM) 2010, the authors evaluated the poster rounds at the 115th Congress of the DGIM 2009 by using a questionnaire that was given to poster presenters, poster chairmen, and visitors. The authors sought to receive an instructive criticism for the organization in 2010. METHODS: Distribution of questionnaires containing ten questions with preformulated response options and an additional field for further comments to all presenters, chairmen, and visitors of the poster rounds during the 115th Congress of the DGIM (April 2009). RESULTS: 159 questionnaires were returned and evaluated. Almost all respondents quoted the poster presentation as being important for their scientific work (98%). In general, they were satisfied with the discussion at the poster rounds (83%). The amount of posters within one round was criticized by 41%, as was the inadequate adherence to time constraints and time frame and room conditions themselves. CONCLUSION: The poster exhibition of the 115th Congress of the DGIM 2009 was evaluated positively by most of the respondents to the survey. Nevertheless, helpful hints were retrieved as how to further improve poster rounds. They should be respected when planning the exhibition at the congress in 2010.