The University of Cape Town, Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, is pleased to invite abstract submissions for the Annual Research Day 2026. Abstracts should reflect original research, case reports, or case series that contribute to the advancement of paediatrics and child health.
Applicants should review their abstracts carefully before upload to ensure clarity, scientific accuracy, and adherence to the submission guidelines. Abstracts that do not comply with the required word limit, structure, or formatting requirements may be excluded from consideration.
The submitting author is responsible for ensuring that the uploaded abstract is the final and correct version. Where applicable, supervisors must review and approve the final version before submission. The online portal includes a mandatory declaration confirming supervisor review, where applicable, and final author verification.
Structure the abstract using the following headings:
Case report and case series abstracts must comply with all general submission requirements. The appropriate structure for each submission type is outlined below.
| Submission Type | Required Structure | Additional Guidance |
|---|---|---|
| Case Report | Background; Case Presentation; Discussion; Conclusion | For a single clinical case. |
| Case Series | Background; Methods; Discussion; Conclusion | The Methods section should include the number of cases, inclusion criteria, setting, data sources, and approach to analysis, where applicable. |
Abstract submissions for Research Day 2026 must have a recognised affiliation with the Department of Paediatrics and Child Health (DPCH), University of Cape Town.
A submission will be considered eligible if at least one of the following criteria is met:
The presenting author holds an official appointment, training post, student registration, or other recognised role within the DPCH, with clinical, research, teaching, academic, or service responsibilities linked to the Department.
The research project is formally supervised, registered, conducted, or academically based within the DPCH, or within one of its affiliated hospitals, divisions, or research units. This applies even where the presenting author does not personally hold an appointment within the DPCH.
Submissions will not be eligible for selection if neither the presenting author nor the research project has a recognised affiliation with the DPCH.
Title: How Should Assent Be Sought in Low-Income Settings? Perspectives from Parents and Children in Southern Malawi
Authors: Helen Mangochi¹, Kate Gooding¹,², Aisleen Bennett¹, Michael Parker³, Nicola Desmond¹,², Susan Bull³
Affiliations:
¹ Malawi-Liverpool Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme, Malawi
² Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom
³ Ethox Centre and Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
Introduction and Background: Paediatric research in low-income countries is essential to tackle high childhood mortality. As with all research, informed consent is an essential part of ethical practice. Guidelines recommend that parents or another proxy provide legal consent, with children involved through assent.
Objectives: Uncertainties remain about when children are ready to give assent and the appropriate processes. Understanding community perspectives can assist in developing contextually appropriate guidance.
Methods: Qualitative research was conducted with children and parents across three contrasting settings in Southern Malawi. Interviews and focus groups explored experiences of assent and views on appropriate practice.
Results: There was widespread support for involving children in research decisions. Factors affecting capacity included physical maturity, intellectual capacity, emotional development, life experience and cultural norms. Age alone was deemed an unreliable indicator.
Conclusion: Participants valued involving children while respecting parents' interest in child welfare. Developing flexible, practical guidance suited to different study types and contexts remains a priority for the research and ethics community.
The Department of Paediatrics and Child Health (DPCH) is committed to fostering an inclusive and active research culture while upholding the highest standards of scientific integrity, research governance, and participant protection.
Unless a formal waiver, exemption, or equivalent determination has been granted by the UCT Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC), all research involving human participants, participant records, clinical data, data collection, data access, data analysis, or secondary analysis must have valid UCT HREC approval before study commencement.
Presenting authors will be required to declare their HREC status in the online submission portal and upload the relevant supporting documentation before an abstract can be submitted.
At the time of abstract submission, one of the following HREC conditions must be met:
| Ethics Status | Requirement |
|---|---|
| Valid current approval | UCT HREC approval has been granted and remains current. The HREC approval letter with reference number must be uploaded. |
| Pending renewal with proof | Where previous UCT HREC approval has been granted but is nearing expiry or has lapsed, applicants must upload formal proof that a renewal application has been submitted. |
| Not applicable with justification | Ethics approval or renewal is not required for the research being presented. A clear and well-justified explanation must be provided, with formal waiver or exemption documentation where applicable. |
Important clarification: A database, registry, or repository number alone is not sufficient evidence of ethics approval. The research being presented must be clearly covered by valid UCT HREC approval.
Valid UCT HREC approval must specifically cover the research being presented.
Approval granted for a database, registry, repository, umbrella study, or related project does not automatically extend to the specific research being presented. Each protocol must independently cover the submitted work.
To be considered valid, UCT HREC approval must meet the following criteria:
| Requirement | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Issued by UCT HREC | Approval must have been granted by the UCT Human Research Ethics Committee and must include a valid HREC reference number. |
| Current approval status | Approval must be current at the time of final Research Day programme confirmation. If renewal is pending, formal proof of renewal submission must be provided at abstract submission. |
| Specific project coverage | Approval must specifically reference the study being presented. |
| Appropriate scope | Approval must cover the full scope of the work being submitted, which includes the approved methodology, participant group, data sources, and any secondary analyses. |
Where HREC approval is expiring, has lapsed, or renewal is pending at the time of abstract submission, applicants must upload formal proof that a renewal application has been submitted.
Acceptable proof includes:
The HREC reference number must be clearly visible in the subject line or body of the uploaded correspondence.
If an abstract is selected for presentation, proof of valid renewed UCT HREC approval must be submitted by the internal deadline for finalising the Research Day programme. This deadline will be communicated separately.
Failure to submit proof of renewed approval by the stated deadline will result in withdrawal of the abstract from the programme. Extensions or exceptions will not be granted.
Applicants, and supervisors where applicable, are responsible for verifying ethics approval dates and initiating renewal applications in sufficient time to meet all Research Day requirements.
The usual processing time for correctly completed HREC renewal applications is approximately four weeks. Applicants should therefore allow adequate time for departmental review, submission to HREC, HREC processing, and any required follow-up.
Delays arising from late submission, incomplete documentation, or inadequate management of the renewal process will not be considered grounds for exception.
Applicants are responsible for ensuring that they understand and comply with the applicable ethics submission, approval, and annual renewal requirements.
For detailed guidance, applicants should consult the DPCH MMED and MPhil Research Website, including the link to the UCT HREC Summary of Types of Applications and Required Approvals for Research Studies.
Applicants must also review the UCT HREC Annual Progress Report Form (FHS016) and comply with all annual renewal obligations where applicable.
Applicants should further familiarise themselves with the relevant UCT HREC guidance on maintaining valid annual ethics clearance for ongoing research.
Submitting authors are responsible for ensuring that their abstract is complete, accurate, and ready for scientific review at the time of submission.
Where applicable, supervisors should review and approve the final version of the abstract before submission.
The submitted abstract must be free of Track Changes, active comments, unresolved edits, reviewer notes, images, charts, figures, and tables.
Research Day presentations are expected to report on completed research. Where final results are not available at the time of abstract submission, this must be clearly stated in the Results section, with preliminary findings and anticipated outcomes provided where applicable.
Acceptance of an abstract for oral or poster presentation is conditional upon final results being available for presentation at Research Day.
Research reporting must align with internationally recognised guidelines available from the EQUATOR Network. Abstracts reporting observational research should comply with the STROBE conference abstract checklist. Supervisors are responsible for ensuring that students are familiar with the appropriate reporting guidelines.
All submitted abstracts will undergo a structured peer-review process conducted by the Scientific Committee.
Abstracts will be assessed according to the following criteria:
| Criterion | Assessment Focus |
|---|---|
| Scientific merit and originality | The quality, relevance, and originality of the research or clinical contribution. |
| Research question and objectives | The clarity, coherence, and academic relevance of the research question, aims, or objectives. |
| Methodology | The appropriateness and rigour of the study design, methods, setting, participants, data sources, and analysis. |
| Results and significance | The quality, relevance, and importance of the findings, including statistical or clinical significance where applicable. |
| Interpretation and conclusions | The extent to which conclusions are supported by the findings, and the relevance of the implications for practice, research, policy, or service delivery. |
| Academic writing and organisation | The clarity, grammatical accuracy, logical structure, and overall coherence of the abstract. |
Selection will be based on clear and consistently applied criteria to support a fair, transparent, and academically rigorous review process.
All abstracts must meet the minimum expected standards for academic integrity, research governance, ethics compliance, and adherence to the submission guidelines.
A prize will be awarded for the best oral presentation by an eligible junior researcher whose primary affiliation is with the UCT Department of Paediatrics and Child Health.
The presenter must meet the definition of a junior researcher and must have made a substantial and clearly identifiable contribution to the research being presented.
For the purposes of this award, a junior researcher is defined as either:
| Category | Definition |
|---|---|
| Early-career researcher | An individual who has not yet obtained a master’s degree at the time of submission and is presenting research to which they have made a substantial and clearly identifiable contribution. This may include a paediatric registrar presenting research not related to their MMED, a medical officer, nursing student, or other early-career researcher. |
| Master’s degree researcher | An individual presenting research conducted as part of their first master’s degree programme, such as an MPhil, MSc, MPH, or equivalent non-MMED degree. The presenter must not already hold a master’s degree at the time of submission. |
To be eligible for consideration for this award, presenters must satisfy all of the minimum criteria below:
| Requirement | Standard |
|---|---|
| Junior researcher status | The presenter must meet the definition of a junior researcher. |
| DPCH affiliation | The presenter’s primary affiliation must be with the UCT Department of Paediatrics and Child Health. |
| Original and substantial contribution | The work must represent the presenter’s own original research. The presenter must have made a clearly identifiable intellectual contribution to the research being presented. The presenter must be listed as the first author on the submitted abstract. If the work has already been published or accepted for publication, the presenter must also be the first author on the related publication. |
| Presentation type | The abstract must be accepted and delivered as an oral presentation at Research Day. |
Substantial contribution refers to active, meaningful involvement in the research process, including but not limited to:
Meeting the minimum eligibility criteria qualifies presenters for award consideration but does not guarantee award selection.
All eligible presenters will be formally evaluated using predefined Research Day adjudication criteria. Final award decisions will be based solely on adjudication panel scoring.
The Dyssell Fund Registrar Research Award recognises the best oral presentation by an eligible current or recently qualified paediatric registrar affiliated with the UCT Department of Paediatrics and Child Health (DPCH) and presenting research conducted as part of their MMED.
An award of R12 000 will be made to support the registrar’s personal academic development, including congress attendance, conference presentation, or related academic activities.
The online submission portal will guide presenters through the award eligibility questions and the upload of any required supporting documentation to support consistent and transparent assessment.
To be eligible for the Dyssell Fund Registrar Research Award, the presenter must fall into one of the following registrar categories:
| Eligible Category | Requirement |
|---|---|
| Current junior paediatric registrar | The presenter is currently registered within UCT DPCH as a junior paediatric registrar and is presenting research related to their MMED. |
| Recently qualified paediatric registrar | The presenter was registered within UCT DPCH as a junior paediatric registrar at the time the research was conducted and is presenting their MMED research. |
In addition, all presenters must meet the following requirements:
| Requirement | Standard |
|---|---|
| MMED research | The work presented must be directly related to the registrar’s MMED research. |
| Oral presentation | The abstract must be accepted and delivered as an oral presentation at Research Day. |
Meeting the minimum eligibility criteria qualifies presenters for award consideration but does not guarantee selection. All eligible presentations will be assessed by the adjudication panel using predefined Research Day criteria based on scientific quality, rigour and originality, as well as the clarity, organisation and delivery of the oral presentation. Presenters are expected to adhere to the allocated time frame, and scores may be adjusted where time limits are exceeded.
Where there is only one eligible registrar presentation, the award will be made only if the presentation meets the expected academic standard, as determined by the adjudication panel. Final award decisions will be based solely on adjudication panel scoring.
A prize will be awarded for the best oral presentation by a researcher whose primary affiliation is with the Department of Paediatrics and Child Health (DPCH), who is either currently registered for a postgraduate degree at the University of Cape Town or has completed a postgraduate degree, and who is not eligible for either the Best Junior Researcher Award or the Dyssell Fund Registrar Research Award.
This award is intended to support the individual’s personal academic development, including conference attendance or related academic activities.
Presenters must meet the following minimum requirements for award consideration:
| Requirement | Standard |
|---|---|
| DPCH affiliation | The presenter’s primary affiliation must be with the Department of Paediatrics and Child Health (DPCH). |
| Postgraduate degree | The presenter must be currently registered for a postgraduate degree at the University of Cape Town, or have completed a postgraduate degree. |
| Substantial contribution | The presenter must have made a substantial and clearly identifiable contribution to the research project being presented. |
| Award exclusivity | The presenter must not be eligible for either the Best Junior Researcher Award or the Dyssell Fund Registrar Research Award. |
Substantial contribution refers to active, meaningful involvement in the research process, including but not limited to:
Meeting the minimum eligibility criteria qualifies presenters for award consideration but does not guarantee award selection.
All eligible presenters will be formally evaluated using a set of predefined Research Day adjudication criteria, assessing the scientific quality, rigour, and originality of the research, and the clarity, organisation, and delivery of the oral presentation within the allocated time frame. Presenters who exceed the time limit may have their overall scores adjusted accordingly.
The Best Poster Presentation Award recognises excellence in research communication, scientific content, and the effective visual presentation of research findings.
A prize will be awarded for the best poster presentation where the first or senior author’s primary affiliation is with the Department of Paediatrics and Child Health (DPCH), University of Cape Town.
To be considered for this award, presenters must meet the following minimum requirements:
| Requirement | Standard |
|---|---|
| Author status | The presenter must be listed as the first or senior author on the poster. |
| DPCH affiliation | The first or senior author’s primary affiliation must be with the Department of Paediatrics and Child Health (DPCH), University of Cape Town. |
| Substantial contribution | The presenter must clearly describe their substantial and identifiable contribution to the research being presented. |
| Poster presentation | The abstract must be accepted and presented as a poster at Research Day. |
Meeting the minimum eligibility criteria qualifies presenters for award consideration but does not guarantee award selection.
All eligible presenters will be formally evaluated using predefined Research Day adjudication criteria. Final award decisions will be based solely on adjudication panel scoring.