|Links to Other ASM Pages:||
Society for Microbiology
Chair: Dr. Bob Walker
Chair-Elect: Dr. Eileen
Division Advisor (Immediate
Past-Chair): Dr. Tom Shryock
The meeting was called to
order by Dr. Walker at 11:00 AM in the presence of approximately 25
attendees. Dr. Walker acknowledged the contributions of Drs. Bolin and
Brown for the Division Z Symposium held just prior to the business
meeting. Dr. Walker introduced the Division leadership.
This included Eileen Thacker as Chair-Elect, 2002, Jeff Gray,
Chair-Elect 2003, Tom Shryock, Division Advisor, Carole Bolin as Division
Councilor and Nancy Cornick as Alternate Councilor. He also introduced Dr.
Susan West (Division Group II Councilor) and Dr. Roy Curtiss (CPC Member).
Membership of Division Z was
estimated to be approximately 440 primary members for 2002. The 2002
meeting had 71 submitted abstracts, with a total of 56 accepted after
"swaps" and non-accepted abstracts were tallied.
Dr. West informed the group
of new wording in the Scope section of Infection and Immunity. The new
wording will accommodate animal health and veterinary microbiology
manuscripts. Case reports, etc., will not be considered.
Dr. Curtiss updated the
group that the Publications Board is exploring the use and citation of
NCCLS methods or other standards within manuscripts.
Dr. Shryock updated the
group that no progress has been made with respect to the development of a
list-serv; in spite of the fact that ASM does provide resources to
Divisions to enable them to develop them. A lack of an identified
individual who would assume responsibility for a list-serv was cited as a
Dr. Walker informed the
group that funding and timing issues precluded the arrangement of a
Division Z Mixer. However, now that sufficient carryover funds are in the
Division Z account, arrangements for 2003 can be made. Dr. Thacker will
begin contact with sponsors later this year to ensure that additional
funds can be collected for carry over for the following year.
A call for topics for
Division Z symposia topics was issued.
Division Z will have two symposia at the 2003 ASM.
In addition, Division Z is discussing the possibility of
co-convening one symposium with Division A and a second with Division G.
It was announced that
abstracts for 2003 would be via web-based submission only; the deadline
for Division Z is December 11, 2002. This year, as with last year, the
Call for Abstracts will list the content expected in a submitted abstract.
In evaluating the abstracts the division leadership relies heavily
on these instructions to the authors and the
complimentary criteria listed in the Division Officer's Handbook.
An issue of concern
regarding the abstract review process was raised by Dr. John Maurer. Dr.
Maurer questioned the transparency and fairness of the process used to
accept or not accept abstracts, stating that some accepted abstracts had
deficiencies whereas he was aware of a non-accepted abstract that had
none. Dr. Maurer asked for the specific criteria that were used to make an
acceptance determination, as well as how those criteria were then applied
across all reviewed abstracts. Dr. Maurer stated that Division Z had a
very high rate of non-accepted abstracts (12%) and he was concerned that
this would discourage future submissions to the Division and also lead to
member loss. He suggested that perhaps a Review Committee might be better
suited to making an evaluation that the current system.
Dr. Walker noted that the
highest rate of non-accepted abstracts was 14%, but many divisions had a
0% non-acceptance rate. Dr.
Walker stated that scientific quality needs to be upheld by leadership to
maintain the reputation of the division and the ASM, and this means that
when there is a review process, some abstracts will not be accepted. The
Division Leadership meeting, held on Sunday, was aware of the disparity in
acceptance rates between divisions and is moving to improve the quality of
the abstracts that are accepted. Dr. Walker explained the ASM review
process whereby the Chair-Elect reads the abstracts and recommends
acceptance, swap, or non-acceptance to the Chair, who can concur or
overrule. For the current review, the Division Advisor was also consulted.
There is no "second chance" process; all decisions are final.
The author is informed by ASM of the acceptance or non-acceptance of the
abstract. For the
non-acceptance a reason i
Dr. Walker (and others)
pointed out that the ASM process does not allow for a Division to
establish a separate review process. Dr. Curtiss pointed out that if there
is a desire to change the process, then that should be brought to the
attention of the Membership Board and/or the Meetings Board.
Dr. Thacker noted that the
leadership changes each year, so if the membership is dissatisfied with a
particular elected official, the election of someone else will provide a
new perspective in subsequent years.
Dr. Carole Bolin raised an
issue that affected veterinary diagnostic laboratories and asked whether
Division Z might be able to help. Many labs are moving away from MIC tests
(full dilution ranges) and even breakpoint ranges to disk diffusion. The
reason, in addition to economic considerations, is that the end-users do
not know how to evaluate an MIC. Dr. Bolin suggested that practical
information on the application of an MIC value to drug selection, based on
pharmacokinetic, mechanism of action, and other basic information, should
be compiled in a handout, pocket card or website. This information would
be useful to educate end-users of the relevance of MICs. Discussion of
what role NCCLS, AAVLD, Division Z or industrial partners could play
followed. Distribution of information could be done via the ASM News, ASM
website, vet school distribution, diagnostic labs, or other means. Dr.
Thacker agreed to follow up on this.
Dr. Walker reminded everyone
to submit symposium ideas (conveners, topics, speakers) as soon as
The meeting was adjourned at
Thomas R. Shryock, Division Advisor
|Last Modified: 06/13/03|
|Copyright © 1998 American Society for MicrobiologyAll rights reserved|