Preparing and Presenting Effective Research Posters
Open accessAbstract
Objectives. Posters are a common way to present results of a statistical analysis, program evaluation, or other project at professional conferences. Often, researchers fail to recognize the unique nature of the format, which is a hybrid of a published paper and an oral presentation. This methods note demonstrates how to design research posters to convey study objectives, methods, findings, and implications effectively to varied professional audiences. Methods. A review of existing literature on research communication and poster design is used to identify and demonstrate important considerations for poster content and layout. Guidelines on how to write about statistical methods, results, and statistical significance are illustrated with samples of ineffective writing annotated to point out weaknesses, accompanied by concrete examples and explanations of improved presentation. A comparison of the content and format of papers, speeches, and posters is also provided. Findings. Each component of a research poster about a quantitative analysis should be adapted to the audience and format, with complex statistical results translated into simplified charts, tables, and bulleted text to convey findings as part of a clear, focused story line. Conclusions. Effective research posters should be designed around two or three key findings with accompanying handouts and narrative description to supply additional technical detail and encourage dialog with poster viewers.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Limiting the focus in a poster to two or three key findings is crucial for an effective research poster.
“However, limiting the focus in the poster to two or three key findings is crucial for an effective research poster [16].”
From What Makes a Good Poster? Evaluating #BetterPoster and Classic Formats at a Scientific Cancer Conference (2026) · cites this paper as [16]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Beilenson, J. 2004. ''Developing Effective Poster Presentations.'' Gerontology News 32 (9): 6-9.
- Briscoe, M. H. 1996. Preparing Scientific Illustrations: A Guide to Better Posters, Presenta- tions, and Publications, 2d edition. New York: Springer-Verlag.
- Davis, M. 1997. Scientific Papers and Presentations. New York: Academic Press.
- Fink, A. 1995. How to Report on Surveys. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
- Friedman, G. D. 1990. ''Be Kind to Your Reader.'' American Journal of Epidemiology 132 (4): 591-3.
- McDonough, J. 2000. Experiencing Politics: A Legislator's Stories of Government and Health Care. Berkeley: University of California Press.
- Miller, J. E. 2005. The Chicago Guide to Writing about Multivariate Analysis. Chicago Guides to Writing, Editing and Publishing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Sorian, R., and T. Baugh. 2002. ''Power of Information: Closing the Gap between Research and Policy.'' Health Affairs 21 (2): 264-73.
- Tufte, E. R. 2001. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, 2d edition. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bentsen, L., & Østergaard, D. E. (2026) · Journal of Cancer Education · doi:10.1007/s13187-025-02622-1 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Miller, J. E.
- Corresponding author
- Miller, Jane E.
- ORCID
- Miller, Jane E.
- Venue
- Health Services Research
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-06-20
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 1p1
- Pages
- 311-328
- ISSN
- 0017-9124 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-6773
- PMC
- PMC1955747
- OpenAlex
- W2021396400
- Cited by
- 58
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 3.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Health Services Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Rutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University) (acceptedVersion)
- Rutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Data Visualization and Analytics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Keywords
- research posters, poster design, science communication, statistical reporting, poster layout, audience adaptation, statistical significance, program evaluation, conference presentations
- MeSH terms
- Audiovisual Aids, Communication, Congresses as Topic, Humans, Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review