History of the Poster Exposition at the FDA Science Forum

In 1988, the FDA chapter of Sigma Xi hosted its first Poster Exposition. It was started at my suggestion to the then-president of the Chapter, Alan Andersen. At that time, there had not been a FDA-wide scientific conference or meeting for a number of years. We suggested an exposition, very much similar to high school science fairs that would bring together all FDA scientists. The posters did not have to be newly prepared for the exposition, but could be any recent poster that had already received necessary clearances and had been presented at a national or international scientific meeting. The Poster Exposition would allow FDA scientists to meet, exchange ideas, and possible form new collaborative research projects. The first Expo was endorsed by the FDA commissioner and was held in the Parklawn building on April 27-28, 1988. It featured some 175 posters. Since 1988, there were 2 other Expositions, in 1989 and 1991 that were sponsored by the FDA Chapter of Sigma Xi. In 1992, the FDA joined the Sigma Xi Chapter and started an additional scientific program, which has grown into the Science Forum that we see today.

Judging of posters -- the process

First of all, let me say that the judges are chosen from the officers of the FDA Chapter of Sigma Xi and from previous winners of the poster exposition. The most frequently asked question about the poster exposition is "how do we determine winners?" I would like to give you my personal answer, since I'm pretty sure that each judge has a slightly different perspective of what constitutes a good poster. I give the judges my personal criteria for a good poster, which I will relate below. We then go out onto the exhibition floor and each judge chose his/her top 3 posters. We reassemble and compare our selections. It is not at all uncommon that we have all picked some of the same posters. We then compile another list from each judge's selection and go re-visit each other's selections. We again reassemble and pick the top three winners. One might think this would be difficult, but it has always been a fairly easy task. I guess that good work just stands out, and get selected.

Judging of poster -- criteria for a winner

First and foremost, a good poster must be clear, concise, important, relevant, and eye-catching

Clear --

• The "bottom line" should be unambiguous. The Title and the conclusion should say something such as "Chemical A kills people at three times the normal dosage", as opposed to "The effects of chemical A on human subjects".
• I've also seen posters titled as " the effects of ", when in fact the poster dealt with the "Lack of effects" or "no effects".
• Have no more than 3 major conclusions. The fewer the better.
• Leave out extraneous information. Lengthy details on "methods and materials" can be obtained later from the authors, if needed.

Concise --

• A poster may be the most important scientific work in a decade, but if the presentation is not concise, the judges can not evaluate it properly.
• The most common mistake is to present too much information, too much data, and too many words. A poster is not a written scientific article. A judge, or a fellow scientist, does not have an hour or two to read a lengthy dissertation.
• The message should be delivered in large type. Use pictures, bullets, arrows and other devices to deliver the message easily.

Important --

• Give a short, very clear statement of the importance of your work
• Examples:
  • This is the first time that this "effect has been seen
  • This method is ten times faster than the previous method
  • This "effect" shows that consumers are in danger of...
  • This method uses far fewer test animals than...

Relevant --

• Show relevance to FDA's mission.
• Don't belabor the relevance, but do show it.
• If appropriate, show usefulness to industry submissions, to field testing, to standards development, etc.
• Relevance and importance are closely related, so don't "beat your brains out" trying to decide the difference between the two criteria.

Eye-catching --

• Yes, the pretty poster often wins.
• You must attract the judges. A pretty poster does that.
• Posters don't have to be hi-tech. A simple, clean, attractive poster can accomplish the same mission of getting someone's attention.
• The most important "eye catcher" is the title. If you can get your "bottom line" across in the title, you're half way toward winning.
• The second most important "eye catcher" is the conclusion.
• If I've read the title and the conclusion and I'm still lost, then your poster is in serious trouble, at least from my perspective as a judge.