The quality of a research study can be defined by the strength of its evidence, but its acceptance at a globally relevant congress depends directly on the clarity of its abstract. With the new and final submission round for the 3rd World Congress on Traditional, Complementary and Integrative Medicine (3rd WCTCIM) open until July 15, 2025, researchers face the challenge of condensing complex studies into a concise and impactful format. A well-structured scientific abstract is not just a summary, but a strategic tool that opens doors for scientific dissemination.

The event, taking place from October 15 to 18, 2025, in Rio de Janeiro, invites submissions in categories such as “Scientific Abstract,” “Clinical Case Reports,” and “Experience Report.” The emphasis on robust methodology and clear data in the “Scientific Abstract” and “Clinical Case Reports” categories is what distinguishes an approved proposal, paving the way for qualified debate. In this guide, we will provide tips on how to qualify your work in the “Scientific Abstract” category.

Structure and Focus: The Foundation of an Impactful Abstract

The “Scientific Abstract” category is designed for original scientific studies that follow the formal structure of introduction, objectives, methods, results, and conclusion. Its purpose is to communicate evidence that strengthens clinical practice, policymaking, or the advancement of integrative health.

In line with international practices for scientific congresses, abstracts must clearly present the study design and its main quantitative results. This logical structure is the first step in demonstrating the value of your work. From there, each section must be constructed with precision and objectivity.

Essential Submission Requirements

When submitting the abstract, the following elements must be considered:

  • Thematic axis
  • Specific topic
  • Author(s) and institutional affiliations
  • Structured abstract body
  • Related TCIM modality
  • Appropriate keywords
  • Preferred presentation format (Poster or Oral Presentation)

Important: All submissions must be made in English through the official system at https://wctcim.cabsin.org.br/new/submission/

Clarity and Precision: From Title to Introduction

A good scientific abstract begins with a clear and direct title. Ideally, it should include the study design and the population evaluated to offer the reader an immediate understanding of the research scope.

The introduction, in turn, should be brief and situate the problem being addressed, pointing out the knowledge gap that the study seeks to fill. Often, a single well-crafted sentence is sufficient to contextualize the clinical relevance and potential impact of the work.

Methodological Rigor: How to Describe Your Methods

The methods section requires transparency and standardization. The author must state the type of study, considering the following categories:

  • Pre-clinical studies (in vitro and in vivo experiments)
  • Controlled clinical studies
  • Observational studies
  • Qualitative studies
  • Mixed-methods studies
  • Cost-effectiveness studies
  • Systematic, scoping, integrative, and narrative reviews
  • Service and program evaluation studies
  • Theoretical-conceptual studies
  • Methodological studies

When describing the steps of your research, remember to include relevant data such as sample size, location of the study, and ethical aspects. If applicable, the ethics committee approval number and clinical trial registration in recognized databases should be mentioned.

To ensure the quality of the report, the use of checklists from the EQUATOR initiative is highly recommended. Tools like STROBE for observational studies and CONSORT for clinical trials guide the description of essential items, such as participant selection, variable definitions, and analysis methods. Adopting these standards reinforces methodological credibility and enhances the consistency of your abstract.

Results and Conclusions: Adapting to Diverse Methodologies

The presentation of results should be adapted to the type of study, always maintaining scientific rigor and clarity in communicating the main findings.

For Controlled Clinical and Observational Studies

In the results section, the focus should be on the main findings, presented quantitatively. Including data such as confidence intervals (95% CI), p-values, risk ratios (RR), odds ratios (OR), and numbers needed to treat (NNT) is fundamental to demonstrating the statistical and clinical significance of the data. For example: “The intervention reduced pain by 3.2 points on the VAS scale (95% CI: 2.5-3.9; p<0.001) compared to the control."

For Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

The results should include the number of studies identified, selected, and included, preferably following the PRISMA flow diagram. Present the pooled effects with their confidence intervals, heterogeneity (I²), and subgroup analyses where relevant. Example: “Of 1,234 identified articles, 23 were included in the meta-analysis. The combined effect showed a significant reduction in symptoms (SMD = -0.68; 95% CI: -0.89 to -0.47; I² = 45%).”

For Pre-clinical Studies (In Vitro and In Vivo)

Present results with measures of central tendency and dispersion (mean ± standard deviation or median with interquartile range). Include the sample size per group and the statistical tests used. For in vivo studies, mention survival rates or exclusions. Example: “The extract inhibited cell growth by 72% ± 8% at a concentration of 100 µg/mL (n=6, p<0.01 vs. control)."

For Cost-Effectiveness Studies

The results should present the incremental costs, incremental effectiveness, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Include sensitivity analyses when applicable. Example: “The ICER was R$12,500 per QALY gained, with an 85% probability of being cost-effective considering a threshold of R$40,000/QALY.”

For Scoping and Integrative Reviews

Focus on synthesizing the main themes or categories identified, with quantification when possible. Present knowledge gaps mapped systematically. Example: “We identified 5 main categories of interventions, with 45% focused on mind-body techniques, and only 12% of studies conducted in low-income countries.”

For Qualitative Studies

The results should present the main themes, categories, or constructs emerging from the analysis. Include the number of participants, sample characteristics, and the analysis method used (thematic analysis, grounded theory, phenomenology, etc.). Use brief, representative quotes when space allows. Example: “Three main themes emerged from the 25 interviews: ‘search for holistic care’ (n=23), ’empowerment in the therapeutic process’ (n=19), and ‘body-mind reconnection’ (n=21). Theoretical saturation was reached at the 20th interview.”

For Mixed-Methods Studies

Present the integration of quantitative and qualitative data, highlighting how the findings complement or diverge. Specify the design used (convergent, sequential exploratory, sequential explanatory). Example: “The quantitative data showed a significant improvement in quality of life (p<0.05), while the interviews revealed that 85% of participants attributed the improvement to the 'personalized approach' and the 'time dedicated by the therapist,' aspects not captured by the quantitative instruments."

For Theoretical-Conceptual and Methodological Studies

Report the main conceptual or methodological developments in a structured manner. For validation studies, include relevant psychometric measures (Cronbach’s alpha, ICC, sensitivity, specificity). Example: “The new instrument demonstrated excellent reliability (α = 0.92) and convergent validity with the standard scale (r = 0.85, p<0.001)."

Guidelines for Impactful Conclusions

Regardless of the methodology, the conclusion should:

  1. Directly answer the objectives: Connect the main findings with the initial research question.
  2. Contextualize relevance: Indicate how the results compare with existing literature.
  3. Present practical implications: Describe how the findings can impact clinical practice, health policies, or future research directions.
  4. Acknowledge main limitations: Briefly mention the most relevant limitations without diminishing the value of the findings.
  5. Avoid extrapolations: Keep the conclusions within the scope of the presented data.

Example of a well-structured conclusion: “This study demonstrated that [intervention] was effective in [main outcome], suggesting its potential as a complementary therapeutic option for [condition]. The results support the integration of this practice into [clinical context], although multicenter studies are needed to confirm the generalizability of these findings.”

Final Details: Keywords and Scientific Abstract Review

To finalize the submission, authors should select three to five keywords based on DeCS (Health Sciences Descriptors) that reflect the study design, population, and theme. Additionally, it is necessary to indicate the work’s thematic axis to guide content categorization and facilitate the evaluation of the scientific abstract:

Thematic axes of the 3rd WCTCIM:

  • Diversity in the Spectrum of Traditional and Complementary Medicine Modalities in the World: from codified traditional medicines and uncodified indigenous knowledge to complementary medical practices.
  • Integration of Traditional and Complementary Medicine into Health Systems: from primary community and private care to hospitals and public health.
  • Evidence-Informed and Research Contributions of TCIM to Global Public Health: from health promotion to challenging clinical conditions (e.g., mental health, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, etc.).
  • TCIM Across the Life Course: from pediatrics to elderly care and palliative care.
  • TCIM Education, Training, and Capacity Building: strengthening health professionals.
  • (F) Planetary Health, One Health, and Healthy Societies: how to pave this path.

A careful linguistic review, especially for texts in English, the official language of the event, is a crucial step. Using academic review tools and the support of native speakers can ensure the text is clear, precise, and professional, consolidating the quality of your abstract submission for the 3rd WCTCIM.

About the 3rd WCTCIM

The 3rd World Congress on Traditional, Complementary and Integrative Medicine (3rd WCTCIM) is promoted by the Brazilian Academic Consortium for Integrative Health (CABSIN), the International Society for Traditional, Complementary and Integrative Medicine Research (ISCMR), and the European Society of Integrative Medicine (ESIM). The event will feature researchers, health professionals, and managers from various countries and aims to promote the exchange of experiences and scientific evidence in the field of integrative and complementary practices, focusing on their articulation with health systems around the world.

Submit Your Abstract

Submission Deadline: Until July 15, 2025

Submit Here

Official Congress Website: https://wctcim.cabsin.org.br

For inquiries: [email protected]