Abstract Submission

Guidelines

1. Abstracts should be typed in English and be no more than 250 words.
    
2. AUTHORS'’ NAMES should be typed in CAPITALS, fill the name and full address of the institution where the scientific work was undertaken then select the name of the presenting author.
    
3. TITLE should be typed in CAPITALS.
    
4. No diagrams of any kind may be incorporated into the abstract.
   Tables must be simple and small.
    
5. The abstract should be in four sections:
   • Introduction stating the aim of the study
   • Patients (or Materials) and Methods
   • Results
   • Conclusion
    
6. The information provided should correspond to an abstract for a published paper and not to a slightly briefer version of a full paper. Provide concise descriptions of methods and results. Do not mention the institution where the study has been performed, the abstract should remain anonymous otherwise it will be rejected.
   If references must be cited in the abstract, they should be in the form (Smith et al. BMJ 1999; 75: 100-1) within the text.
   Abbreviations need not be defined if they are in the list of accepted abbreviations currently published in the Journal of Pediatric Urology. Other abbreviations should be defined on first mention.
   All special symbols or formatting not normally accessible on a keyboard, or that may be lost in conversion (e.g. Greek letters, "‘more than or equal to", subscripts, superscripts, etc.) should be spelled out in words so that they can be replaced during the editing.
    
7. On behalf of all authors, the submitter must agree that if an abstract is accepted, names and institutions will be published on ESPU Website, mobile app, abstract book and congress program (printed and PDF). According to GDPR regulations, authors at any time may request ESPU to modify or remove their names and contact information from all related on-line publications.
    
8. Videos: Abstract describing the video should be submitted under the correct category called "video" and the video file must be sent online:
   
   Please use any file transfer tool to send the video, we suggest to use the following: video file upload form
   or to upload the video file with WeTransfer. If so, don't forget to inform us and forward the download link to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

   Video Abstract text and file upload deadline are now aligned on the same date: 30^th of January 2025 at 23:59 (GMT+1 Europe/Paris time zone)
   So don't wait until the last minute to submit your video!

   Preparation of Abstracts: same instructions as for oral presentation abstract.

   Accepted Video File Types: MP4, MKV, MPEG, MOV, AVI, WMV

   No music, no copyright protected video belonging to third parties.

   Instructions for Video Submissions:

   1. All digital videos must be recorded in English.
   2. Audio comments on the video are obligatory.
   3. Explanations by added drawing are recommended.
   4. The opening of the presentation should begin with the exact title and the authors’ names and affiliation.
   5. Full HD 1080p resolution if possible.
   6. Length: 5 Minutes. Digital video presentations that are longer than 5 minutes in duration will automatically be rejected.

Please also note :

• The scientific committee has the right to make the final decision regarding the session and category where the abstract will be presented.
• The results in the abstract can only be submitted once to the same meeting, even if it appears with different authors and title, different category or preferred presentation.
• An anonymous online review of abstracts will be done by each member of the scientific committee and by additional online only reviewers. Basic research papers will be reviewed by experts on related fields.
• Reviewers will give rankings taking into consideration the following criteria:
  1. DESIGN: Is it specified as prospective, retrospective or questionnaire only?
  2. CONTROL GROUP: Is there one? If there is, is it multiple test on one group, matched, randomised, or matched and randomised?
  3. MATERIAL: Is it unique? Is it adequate in terms of size and length of follow up?
  4. METHODS: Objectivity and validity of the methods as well as the description of it.
  5. RESULTS: Are they presented properly? Are they unique, new and important or serving to existing knowledge?
  6. CONCLUSION: Is there a valid conclusion that is supported by results?
• The final decision will be taken during the scientific committee meeting, abstracts with widely divergent scores or scores near the cutoff point for acceptance will be discussed there.