Powerful, Enterprise-Grade Event Management Software
Sell tickets & Collect registration fees online
Full-Service Abstract Management Software: Collect ➩ Assign ➩ Review ➩ Decide ➩ Notify
Customizable forms to collect & review abstracts, symposia, proposals & grants
The Complete Event Schedule Builder to Create Virtual & Hybrid Sessions
Create Event Schedule with Slides, Group Chats, Survey forms & more
Engagement Tools to Host Virtual Conferences & Online Community Website
Engage attendees & Produce knowledge with online networking portal
Reviewers are the most important factor, without whom any large conference cannot work. They read, assess, and score the hundreds of submissions that come in. But as the number of submissions grows, so does the problem. Reviewer fatigue affects them deeply. Reviewers feel drained, lose focus, and become less consistent in their evaluations. Any conference organizer must take care of this fatigue to maintain quality, fairness, and reviewer satisfaction. Continue reading
Communicating effectively is the single most vital component of an abstract review process that leads to success. When authors receive regular updates, clear directions, and accurate feedback, they can complete the submission and revision stages without any issues. Event organisers, in contrast, save themselves the trouble of confusion, get fewer follow-up questions, and keep a professional workflow going from the beginning to the end.
In the context of the academic and research ecosystem, the process of abstract review becomes the foundation of discourse in events. Abstract blind reviews come in many different types. These different forms of reviews serve different goals, and in certain situations, the level of transparency comes into play.
The academic landscape has transformed immensely, and the peer-review process is no exception. Every year, there is an increase in the volume of abstract submissions to academic conferences and journals. Behind every review process lies an abstract, which functions as a first impression of the research. It also acts as a summary that helps the reviewers understand whether a paper requires further attention or not.
If you’re managing abstract submissions for an academic conference, you know the peer review process can feel like herding cats. Reviewers miss deadlines, authors submit incomplete materials, and you’re stuck sending reminder emails at midnight. Manual peer review management creates bottlenecks that delay your entire conference timeline.