In our ongoing commitment to enhancing the functionality and user experience of our platform, Dryfta is thrilled to introduce a set of impactful updates to our submission and review processes. These new features are designed to provide more control and flexibility for organizers, improve transparency for authors, and streamline the overall workflow.
In the fast-paced world of event management, data is king. Whether it's abstract submissions, ticket orders, or session information, having instant access to your data can make all the difference. That's why we're thrilled to announce a significant update to Dryfta's API and our Zapier integration. This update allows you to pull a wealth of information from Dryfta into your preferred third-party platforms effortlessly. Let's delve into what this means for you.
Home > Blog > Abstract management software > Step-by-Step Guide to Set up Peer Review for Abstract Submissions
Setting up a peer review system for abstract submissions can be critical to managing a conference or academic event. Dryfta is a platform that helps organizers manage various aspects of their event, including abstract submission and peer review.
Participants often submit abstracts, research summaries, or presentations when organizing an academic conference or event. Before these abstracts are accepted and scheduled for presentation, they usually undergo a quality check. This quality check is known as “peer review.”
Home > Blog > Abstract management software > Abstract Management Software: Top 10 Features to Look For
It can be cumbersome and frustrating to manage hundreds of papers in your inbox coming in for review from authors around the world. Authors are sending in their abstracts; you have to gather them, set them up for review, schedule sessions, generate abstract books, communicate with authors and reviewers, and more.
Abstracts need to be distributed to reviewers for review and discussion. But with several authors, their abstracts and proposals on varying topics, the management of these abstracts can become muddled up.
That is where abstract management software comes in. Abstract management software can help you sort out your work by streamlining participating authors’ submission, review assignment, discussion, and authentication of abstracts.
However, many options are available for conference abstract management software in the tech-driven age. So, which one do you choose for your next conference?
Here are the top 10 features you should look for before committing to an abstract management software.
Hire an IT expert or take it for a trial run yourself but ensure that the software you choose for your next academic event has most of these features for the best and most efficient abstract submission experience.
Continue reading
When planning your conference or event, you want to maximize your potential for attracting high-quality submissions, and you know it all starts with a call for papers. But how do you go about reaching interested parties and maximizing your submissions?
Generating buzz around your event is all about releasing a compelling call for abstracts, which isn’t all that challenging when you follow a few simple guidelines.
Continue reading
Home > Blog > Abstract management software > Step-by-Step Guide to Set up Peer Review for Abstract Submissions
Since the dawn of email, its main shortcoming has been that it’s rarely concise or categorizable. Naturally, this poses a considerable challenge when coordinating conferences in which minute detail and adherence to regulations are of utmost importance for a successful outcome. This issue is primarily a consequence of a few ways one can immediately obtain all their required information from a quick scan of an email.
Submitting proposals over email is another roadblock to the smooth running of research conferences. Often the candidate/researchers will not be aware of the criteria their proposal must meet, leading to frustrating confusion, delayals, and unnecessarily increased workload.
A possible solution to this common problem is to inform all potential participants of the expected due dates, word counts, etc. However, adherence to these guidelines is challenging to track, considering the sheer volume of emails involved. There is also the added step of forwarding the email contents to prospective reviewers for reviewal. In turn, these reviews would be submitted by email. Thus manual pairing of reviews to the proposal would be necessary. As expected, an email-based correspondence platform for a conference would require considerable admin and extra hours of work/maintenance.