HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) CME Test (opens in a new window) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Choi, J. R. Articles by Davis, R. B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Choi, J. R. Articles by Davis, R. B. Related Collections Other Related Article

How to Create an effective Scientific Exhibit: Analysis of Award-winning Exhibits from the 1998 RSNA Meeting¹

¹ From the Departments of Diagnostic Radiology (J.R.C., J.B.K., M.P.R.) and General Internal Medicine (R.B.D.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 1 Deaconess Rd, Boston, MA 02215. Recipient of a Certificate of Merit award for a scientific exhibit at the 1999 RSNA scientific assembly. Received February 4, 2000; revision requested March 15 and received April 18; accepted April 19, Address correspondence to J.B.K. (e-mail: jkruskal@caregroup.harvard.edu).

Although the most important component of an effective scientific exhibit is content, the way in which an exhibit is constructed can greatly influence its overall effectiveness. Choice of format should be determined by carefully analyzing the purpose of one's exhibit, expected audience, and data at hand, as well as type of meeting and funding. Depending on the type of data to be presented and available equipment and budget, the most appropriate style for a scientific exhibit may be a traditional mat board, computer-generated tiles or large-print backboard panel, traditional mat board with viewbox exhibit, matted transparency tiles with viewbox exhibit, or computer-generated large-film display. The authors analyzed 993 of 1,041 (95.4%) scientific exhibits on display at the 84th RSNA Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting and categorized each exhibit according to the following characteristics: display type and size, color scheme, display font size, and graphic styles. These characteristics were then correlated with scientific exhibit and design awards as well as invitations for submission to RadioGraphics. Chance of winning an award or being asked to publish the presentation in RadioGraphics was significantly increased for viewbox exhibits (compared with backboard panel exhibits) and for larger exhibits (compared with smaller exhibits).

Index Terms: Education • Radiology and radiologists

Related Article

Invited Commentary

Steven K. Teplick
RadioGraphics 2000 20: 1071-1072. [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. J. Weadock, F. J. Londy, J. Lin, and J. H. Ellis Improving Educational Computer Exhibits at Radiologic Meetings by Modifying Computer Environment: Results of an Observational Study RadioGraphics, November 1, 2002; 22(6): 1561 - 1565. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. C. Lentle, W. W. Olmsted, and T. C. McLoud Of Posters and Exhibits and Other Things Radiology, March 1, 2001; 218(3): 620 - 620. [Full Text]

				B. C. Lentle, W. W. Olmsted, and T. C. McLoud Of Posters and Exhibits and Other Things RadioGraphics, March 1, 2001; 21(2): 356 - 356. [Full Text] [PDF]