California Athletic Trainers’ Association (CATA)
Annual Clinical Symposium and State Meeting
Embassy Suites by Hilton Sacramento Riverfront Promenade
100 Capitol Mall, Sacramento, CA 95814
February 22nd – 23rd, 2020


Friday, December 6th(2019)

The CATA Clinical Symposium Planning Committee would like to invite everyone to submit a Free Communication Abstract by December 6, 2019.  Please take this opportunity to participate with the Free Communications Program! This is a great way to network, build your resume, and continue to advance our professional practice!

The CATA Clinical Symposium Planning Committee is committed to the mission of the NATA Research and Education Foundation Free Communications Program to advance the discovery, dissemination, and application of scientific knowledge in athletic training domains through written and oral forum. This mission is realized by communicating scientific knowledge to the athletic training community through the sharing of peer-reviewed original research reports and unique clinical case reports during the CATA Annual Meeting and Clinical Symposium. All accepted abstracts are presented in poster format.

The CATA Free Communication Program follows the NATA-Research and Education Foundation criteria including a structured abstract that will be reviewed for content, format,and overall quality.  All abstracts will be blindly reviewed by at least 2 athletic trainers.  In order to provide reviews in an expedient manner, it is essential that all abstracts are well-written, free from spelling and grammatical errors, and contain sufficient detail to enable expert review by our committee.

Free Communications Submission Tracks (both will undergo a blind review):

    1. Peer-Reviewed track – Researchers of all levels (professional or students) are eligible to submit.
    2. Student Exchange Track – Only professional (students enrolled in AT Program) or pre-professional (students not enrolled in AT Program) are eligible to submit.

All presentations must be of original work (not previously presented); however, presenters may also present their work at other NATA national, state, and district meetings and the NATA Athletic Training Educators’ Conference. Individuals may submit only one abstract as the primary (presenting) author but may submit unlimited abstracts as a secondary author.

Estimated Timeline for Free Communication Submission and Review:

    • October 2019: Call for abstracts and submission open
    • December 6th, 2019: Submission Deadline (11:59pm PT)
    • January 6th, 2020: Abstract notices are emailed to authors
    • February 22 & 23, 2020: Abstracts are presented in poster format at the Annual Meeting and Clinical Symposium.


Instructions for Abstract Preparation and Submission:

Abstract Submission Procedures:

  1. Submit online via Qualtrics Survey
    1. Submit author information
    2. Upload abstract
      • Name the document with the first author’s last name and the submission track
        • e.g., Johnson – Student Exchange
        • e.g., Johnson- Peer-Review
  2. Complete submission by December 6th, 2019 at 11:59pm PT.

Abstract Categories:

          1. Basic Research
            1. Basic Sciences (e.g. muscle tissue biopsy, EMG, etc)
            2. Epidemiology (e.g. cohort, case-control, intervention, clinical trial)
            3. Biomechanics (e.g. motion analysis, jump landing characteristics)
          2. Survey Research
            1. Instrument development (e.g., validation, psychometrics)
            2. Cross-sectional survey (e.g., paper, web-based, etc)
          3. Qualitative Research (research using qualitative techniques e.g., interviews)
          4. Level 1-3 CASE Study/Series
          5. Level 4 Rare Case Study

CASE Study abstract guidelines update:

As of August 2017 the CASE (Contributing to the Available Sources of Evidence) study guidelines have been revised to be more inclusive of both evidence-based and practice-based evidence. Drawing from recent publications,1-4there are now four types of CASE study abstracts. Levels 1-3 are submitted in one format and Level 4 is submitted in a different format. 

Table 1. Comparison of types of CASE report/study based on terminology and research design

Traditional TerminologyNew Terminology*Abstract Format (see guidelines on following pages) CASE Study
CASE StudyLevel 1 Validation CASE StudyLevel 1-3 Clinical CASE Study Abstract Guidelines
CASE StudyLevel 2 Exploration CASE Study/Series (series of unique AND similar cases)Level 1-3 Clinical CASE Study Abstract Guidelines
CASE StudyLevel 3 Exploration CASE Study (unique cases that have atypical presentation of features)Level 1-3 Clinical CASE Study Abstract Guidelines
CASE ReportLevel 4 Rare Events CASE StudyLevel 4 Clinical CASE Study Abstract Guidelines

*The level of the clinical case should be indicated in the abstract body and/or title to facilitate thereview process.

Authors are encouraged to review the following references to determine the level of case study they are submitting:

          1. McKeon JMM, King MA, McKeon PO. Clinical Contributions to the Available Sources of Evidence (CASE) Reports: Executive Summary. J Athl Train. 2016;51(7):581.
          2. McKeon JMM, McKeon PO. Evidence-based practice or practice-based evidence: what’s in a name? Int J Athl Ther Train. 2015;20(4):1-4.
          3. McKeon JMM, McKeon PO. New year, a new set of guidelines for making clinical contributions to the available sources of evidence. Int J Athl Ther Train. 2016;21(1):1-3.
          4. McKeon JMM, McKeon PO. Building a case for case studies. Int J Athl Ther Train. 2015;20(5):1-5.


Format for Original Research Abstracts

The Title of your Abstract Bolded and in Title Case

[3 spaces]Doe JT*, Public JQ†: *First Author’s Institution Name, †Second Author’s Institution.

[Blank Line]

[Blank Line]

Context:Write a sentence or two summarizing the rationale for the study, providing a reason for the study question and/or uniqueness of study. State the precise objective(s) or question(s) addressed in the report, including a priori hypotheses if applicable.

 Methods:Describe the overall study design of the project reported (e.g., randomized controlled trial, crossover trial, cohort or cross-sectional). Describe the environment in which the study was conducted to help readers understand the transferability of the findings, (e.g., patient clinic, research laboratory or field). Describe the underlying target population, selection procedures (e.g., population based sample, volunteer sample or convenience sample) and important aspects of the final subject pool (e.g., number, average age, weight, height and measures of variance, years of experience or gender). Appropriate sample size should be evident. Describe the independent variables (e.g., interventions, exposure) in the study. Describe the essential pieces of the experimental methods, types of materials, measurements and instrumentation utilized, data analysis procedures and statistical tests employed. Clearly identify primary or critical dependent variables that support the primary objective(s) of the study. Provide validity and reliability information on novel instrumentation. Indicate the statistical analysis employed to answer the primary research objective(s).

Results:The main results of the study should be given. Comparative reports must* include descriptive data (e.g., proportions, means, rates, odds ratios or correlations), accompanying measures of dispersion (e.g., ranges, standard deviations or confidence intervals) and inferential statistical data. Results should be accompanied by the exact level of statistical significance. The P value should not exceed 3 digits to the right of decimal. When the exact significance is below P < .001, the exact significance should be reported as P < .001. Tables and figures can be used to efficiently communicate the results. If tables or figures are included with the abstract they need to be referenced in the abstract.

Conclusions:Summarize or emphasize the new and important findings of the study. The conclusion must be consistent with the study objectives and results as reported and should be no more than three to four sentences. Relate implications of the findings for clinical practice. Word Count: Limited to 450 words including headings.

 * The purpose of having both descriptive and inferential data is that it provides the reader with the ability to judge the concluding statements. Descriptive data provides confidence that the data are ‘reliable’ and provides a gauge to determine whether the inferential statistics and conclusions are meaningful. Studies reporting analysis of larger data bases with multiple variables do not need to report all descriptive data, but should provide descriptive data for those variables which the author(s) believe to be the primary outcome(s) and support the overall conclusions of the study. Tables or figures can be efficient methods to share these results.


Level 1-3 Clinical CASE Study Abstract Guidelines

The Title of your Abstract Bolded and in Title Case
[3 spaces]Doe JT*, Public JQ†: *First Author’s Institution Name, †Second Author’s Institution. [Blank Line]
[Blank Line]
Background: Provide an overview of the condition of interest using available evidence, where appropriate. Indicate the level of the clinical CASE Study. For a Level 1 validation CASE study, the authors should provide a clear description of the previously reported comparison study and highlight the most important findings. For Level 2 & 3 exploration case studies/series, introduce the alternate, unique, or irregular presentation of the case examined compared to the available evidence.
Patient: Present the clinical case(s), including primary patient characteristics (age, sex, sport if appropriate, sport or activity, and years of experience) and diagnosis. For a case series, describe the underlying target population with measures of means and variance and important aspects of the subject pool. Pertinent aspects of the medical history should be included. Describe their complaints, MOI, initial clinical examination, diagnostic imaging, lab tests, and their commonality (examples: characteristic, injury, postural/gait abnormality, pathology, MOI). Describe the process that led to the diagnosis of the condition.
Intervention or Treatment: Describe the management of the case, interventions used, the timeline for progression to final resolution in the case, and the specific time points when treatment was provided. Relevant and unique details should be included. For level 2 or 3 case studies/series, compare and contrast the interventions used with the typical presentation of the condition as described in the literature.
Outcomes or other Comparisons: Describe the primary outcomes or results of the case. For Level 1 CASE studies, compare and contrast the outcome from the current case to the outcome of the previously reported comparison study. Compare / contrast the outcomes used in the Level 2 or Level 3 Exploration CASE Studies / CASE Series with the typical presentation of the condition as previously described. For Case Series, report whether all patients responded similarly to each other. For this, it is important to ensure that similar outcome measures were used.
Conclusions: Interpret the findings of the study. For Level 1 CASE studies, discuss the current case in the context with the previously reported comparison study including the similarities and differences in the patient and outcomes. Discuss challenges associated with implementing the intervention from the comparison study “in real life” and provide recommendations for continued use of the assessment or intervention. For Level 2 & 3 case studies/series, discuss the challenges associated with the case due to the atypical presentation and provide recommendations for clinical practice.
Clinical Bottom Line: Provide an overall statement of the most important clinical points that can be gleaned from the current CASE study.

Word count:600

Level 4 Clinical CASE Study Abstract Guidelines

The Title of your Abstract Bolded and in Title Case
[3 spaces]Doe JT*, Public JQ†: *First Author’s Institution Name, †Second Author’s Institution.[Blank Line]
[Blank Line]
Background: Include the individual’s age, sex, sport or activity, pertinent aspects of their medical history, a brief history of their complaint and physical findings from the athletic trainer’s examination.
Differential Diagnosis: Include all possible diagnoses suspected based on the history, mechanism of injury, and the initial clinical examination prior to physician evaluation and subsequent diagnostic imaging and laboratory tests.
Treatment: Include the physician’s evaluation and state the results of diagnostic imaging and laboratory results if performed. The final diagnosis of the injury or condition and subsequent treatment and clinical course followed should be clearly detailed. Relevant and unique details should be included, as well as the final outcome of the case.
Uniqueness: Briefly describe the uniqueness of this case such as its mechanism, incidence rate, evaluate findings, rehabilitation, or predisposing factors.
Conclusions: Include a concise summary of the case as reported and highlight the case’s importance to the athletic training profession and provide the reader with a clinical learning opportunity.

Word Count:Limited to 600 words including headings.

Please do not hesitate to contact any member of the CATA Clinical Symposium Planning Committee if you have any questions about the programs or process.

CATA Symposium Planning Committee

Committee Members

 Christopher D.  Bates, ATC, RSCC, CSCS*D
U.S.A Water Polo

Jamie DeRollo, DAT, MBA, ATC
Modesto Junior College

Liana Groel, MS, ATC
El Camino High School

Chloe Kipnis, MS, ATC, CSCS
Marlborough School

Mimi Nakajima, EdD, ATC
Long Beach State University

Charles J. Ramos, DHSc, ATC, CSCS, CKTP
Diablo Valley College

Nadine Waeghe, MPT, ATC
Elevate Performance and PT

Committee Chair
Adam C. Cady, MHS, ATC, CSCS, PA-C
Kerlan-Jobe Institute




© 2016 California Athletic Trainers' Association. All rights reserved.