Summaries' maximum length is of 300 words.

Summaries will be written in English, which is the official language for the Congress.

All communications will be supplied in a poster format and won't be presented verbally. The Scientific Committee will decide which communications will be presented during the Congress to an audience.

All abstracts must contain at least the following information (common structure):

1. Title: Concise and clarifying the subject covered and also the main conclusions of the document.
2. Authors: Name and first surname. Please confirm which author would be presenting to an audience should the abstract be chosen by the Scientific Committee (underlined).
3. Affiliation: Institution, organisation or company that they author belongs to.
4. Conflict of interests: authors must highlight any financial, or other, relationships established with any organisation, institution or company that could create a conflict of interests related to the work presented. If authors consider there is no conflict of interests they will confirm this by noting in the application: «The authors of this document can confirm there is no conflict of interests».
5. No bibliographic quotes, tables or figures should be included.

If the document is an original creation,as well as the common structure, it should also contain the details below:

1. Introduction: Purpose and relevance of study along with a hypothesis.
2. Methods: brief description, though clear and complete, of the elements and methods, including the selection criteria and the use of validated measurement tools.
3. Results: the main results of the study need to be specified.
4. Conclusions, discussion and/or practical application: main conclusions, limitations of the study, a report with the document findings in comparison with similar studies and its possible practical use will need to be specified.

If the document is a reviewed piece, as well as the common structure, it should also include the following data:

1. Introduction: Purpose and relevance of study along with previous documents to the review presented.
2. Methods: brief description, clear and complete, of the databases consulted for the gatherings of the study, along with the inclusivity criteria taken into consideration for the review (type of study included in the review, quantity of minimal sample, or minimal duration for the intervention).
3. Results: the total quantity of the recovered articles found by search, as well as the articles used to create the revision (articles that fulfil all inclusion criteria). The main findings of the revision must be specified.
4. Conclusions, discussion and/or practical application: main conclusions, limitations of the study, a report with the document findings in comparison with similar studies and its possible practical use.

In the case scenario of presenting a project/programas well as the common structure, it should also contain the details below:

1. Introduction: relevance and precedence of the project/program.
2. Objectives and target population: indicate the main objective of the project/program as well as defining and characterising whom it is aimed to.
3. Previous theories and investigations: define briefly and clearly the principal theories and findings that scientifically support the project/program.
4. Intervention(s): brief, clear and complete explanation of the essence of the main intervention(s).
5. Evaluation: confirm the way of evaluating the size of the effect of the intervention.
6. Results (if the intervention has taken place): the main results must be specified and also the size of the effect of the intervention.
7. Conclusions of authors and discussion: the document must specify the main conclusions, the difficulties found in the development of the study (if the intervention has taken place), a comparative of findings with other similar projects / programs and recommendations for an improvement to the intervention (if applicable).