Competitions E-mail Secretariat

(All queries should be only related to EMARCS2017)


  • Applicants are expected to abide by the rules of WACEM
  • Violation of rules can lead to disqualification.
  • There are six competitions. 
  • Applicants can apply to multiple competitions.
  • Each applicant can present only at one section of each competition.
  • At least two of the listed authors have to be registered for WACEM.
  • Results of winners for each section will be announced at the Valedictory Function.
  • INDUSEM assumes that the applicant is submitting a presentation, which is new and never been submitted at any meeting or competition or conference other than WACEM.
  • Concerning Original Research WACEM assumes that the researcher has followed the guidelines of by his or her Institutional ethics board and conducted an IRB approved study.
  • No data presented will carry any patient identifiers; name, address or full face picture.
  • There is no conflict of time between workshops and competitions so competitors can register for workshops and compete in the competitions as well.

Time duration allotted to each presentation will be strictly adhered to. You will be interrupted if you exceed the time limit and asked to discontinue. Marks will be deducted for exceeding allotted time

The participants for the contests must register for the conference in advance. The entries will not be considered unless they have registered for the conference.

The entries must reach the organizers by 31stAugust 2017 11.59 lanka Standard Time. The selected candidates will be informed by 15th September 2017 via e-mail. The organizing scientific committee’s decision will be final and no queries regarding the selection process will be entertained.

The entries should be submitted electronically with the subject title of the competition; Example “RPC Entry” for Research Poster Competition. Incomplete entries will be rejected. The entries should be submitted to emarcs2017@yahoo.com latest by 31st August 11:59 PM LANKA Standard Time.



(5000 LKR Prize Money Total)

The CPC Competition is inter-residency program competition held between the MD/DNB/MCEM residency programs which are a part of the CPC League.


The Clinical Pathologic Case (CPC) competition is one of the highlights at INDUSEM each year. CPC presentations are a fun and instructive way of demonstrating the “emergency medicine approach” to the diagnosis and initial management of patients with undifferentiated complaints. There are two main components to the CPC competition: (1) the case presentation, and (2) the case discussion. The case presentation is an opportunity to demonstrate skill in performing a concise yet meaningful review of the pertinent historical, physical examination, and diagnostic testing data points in a complex Emergency Medicine case. The case discussion demonstrates the logical, deductive process used in clinical Emergency Medicine to develop and analyze a long list of potential diagnoses to arrive at the most probable diagnosis.

In past years, selection of cases for presentation was done by the competition organizers, and teams only competed for the award of best case discussion. This year, each team that registers for the CPC competition must compete in both categories… and two prizes will be awarded! One prize will be given for the best case presentation; this will be awarded to the person/team that submits and presents the most interesting case for their competition to discuss. The second prize will be given, as usual, for the best case discussion.

This document provides a more in-depth look at what makes a truly great CPC case presentation, and how to develop an award winning case discussion. Both aspects of the CPC competition will take time, thought, and preparation to develop. Best of luck, and let the games begin!


To enter the competition, each team must agree to provide a CPC case to the conference organizers before the Case Submission Deadline. Any team that fails to submit a case by the Case Submission Deadline will forfeit their registration and will be excluded from competition.

Teams will be comprised of two people: one case presenter, and one case discussant. A faculty member may register as the case presenter, but only a resident may be case discussant. The faculty member will present and give the follow up discussion for the case their team submitted, NOT for the case that their resident received for discussion.

Once all cases have been received and reviewed by the CPC judges, they will each be assigned to a different team for case discussion.

On competition day, each case presenter should be prepared to present the case that they initially submitted. They should also come prepared to give a brief follow-up presentation of the final diagnosis, and of the patient’s clinical course and outcome.

Special Case Submission Deadline: 31st August 2017

Email the Case to induscpc@yahoo.com

Presentation Time-length:*

  1. Case Presentation (FACULTY from institution that submitted the case): 4 minutes
  2. Case Discussion (RESIDENT): 10 minutes
  3. Case Follow-up (FACULTY from institution that submitted the case): 4 minutes
  4. *Note: This the maximum time allowed for each segment of the CPC competition and will be strictly adhered to. Presentations that run over the allotted times will be stopped by the judges.


  1. Selecting a case for the CPC conference The case presentation is a concise description of an emergency department patient case. Given the variety of cases seen in a typical Emergency Department, the spectrum of potential CPC cases is broad. Cases that are unusual presentations of common diagnoses or typical presentations of unusual diagnoses make the best cases for CPC presentation. The best cases for CPC conference have several elements in common: “relevance”, “solvability”, and “discuss-ability”. CPC cases must be (a) relevant to emergency medicine practice, (b) contain enough clues for the other team to be able to “get” the final diagnosis if their analysis is sound, yet (c) be enough of a diagnostic challenge to allow for interesting discussion!

    Cases are considered relevant if the final diagnosis can deduced, or highly suspected, based upon information available in the ED. Although the final diagnosis may have been confirmed after the ED evaluation, by a test not usually performed or resulted during a patient’s stay in the ED, enough information must be available at the time of ED presentation and initial work-up to place the diagnosis at, or near, the top of the list of probable diagnoses. “Relevance” means the case is potentially “solvable”. The discussant must have a reasonable opportunity to make, deduce, or highly suspect the final diagnosis after a thoughtful, logical discussion of the differential diagnosis. Cases that are highly complex, contain multiple primary diagnoses, or are laden with many extraneous facts may be impossible to solve and do not make good CPC cases. Finally, the case must be “discuss-able”. Cases that are too “easy” to get do not allow a demonstration of the deductive process used to reach a diagnosis do not afford the opportunity to teach the audience to think logically.

  2. Preparing and submitting the case After an appropriate case is selected by your institution, it will need to be prepared for submission to the INDUS-EM  conference organizers. Please submit the case at induscpc@yahoo.com using Word document format. Include the chief complaint, the history of present illness, past medical and surgical histories, social histories, medications, and allergies (in that order). Then provide the vital signs and physical examination at an appropriate level of detail. If diagnostic studies were obtained in the emergency department or casualty, present the results. This might include pulse oximetry, basic laboratory tests (with appropriate units), radiographs, electrocardiograms and other selected studies. If possible, please include photos or photocopies of electrocardiogram or radiographic studies – however, be sure to remove any patient identifiers (such as patient name) if you do so! Do not use abbreviations in the case presentation.

    Do not interpret the data you present. In other words, let the discussant interpret the EKG, read the chest x-ray (if you can submit an image with sufficient quality) or calculate the anion gap. The contextual interpretation of data is an important part of the CPC discussion!

    It is customary to present all information obtained in the ED, usually in the order in which it was collected. Let the discussant decide which bits of information are relevant and which are “red herrings”. Incomplete and irrelevant historical and physical examination data are part of the practice of Emergency Medicine.

    On rare occasion, it may be appropriate to withhold a confirmatory test obtained in the ED as long as the case is solvable based upon the other information provided. Remember, the goal of this academic exercise is not to “stump” the discussant but to present an interesting and educational conference.

    Presenting a case in a CPC competition

    The case presenter will begin by presenting to the audience all the patient information that was submitted. Do not provide any information to the audience that has not been given to the discussant at this point. Do not interpret data for the audience. Present the case, clearly, concisely, and succinctly. Conclude the case presentation and offer the floor to the discussant. This should take no longer than four minutes.

    After the discussant is finished with his or her presentation, the case presenter will provide a brief follow-up. The goals of this portion of the CPC conference are to reveal the final diagnosis, present diagnostic data that confirms the diagnosis, discuss the diagnosis and its applicability to Emergency Medicine, and summarize the features of the case from the original presentation that allow a reasonable guess at the diagnosis. This presentation should also take no longer than four minutes.

    Some may prefer to reveal the final diagnosis first and then offer data that confirmed the diagnosis. Others may prefer to describe the diagnostic test results before the final diagnosis is revealed. A brief description of the patient’s hospital course and outcome is appropriate here. Briefly summarize the Emergency Department stabilization and treatment. Since important aspects of the selected case were relevance and solvability, the presenter should explain why the case is relevant and solvable to the audience. You may accomplish this by pointing out the historical, physical or diagnostic data points that would prompt a practicing Emergency Physician to suspect the final diagnosis. This part of the conference provides an important summary of the educational value of the CPC conference.


  1. Goals of the CPC case discussionThe main goal of the CPC is to illustrate the measured, logical progression from an emergency department patient presentation to a narrowed differential diagnosis. Always keep this goal in mind. This is your chance to show your thought process to the audience. Do not focus on making a final diagnosis, and do not get too caught up in making the correct diagnosis. Focus on the process by which final diagnosis is derived.

    Discussing an unknown case in front of an audience can be stressful, but it is also exciting and challenging. Adequate preparation for the discussion will make the presentation most enjoyable for you and for the audience.

  2. Preparing the case discussionStart by reviewing the case information. Initially, you should consider each data point that was given to be potentially relevant to the case resolution. Seemingly inconsequential information may prove to be pivotal. Next, think about which features of the case seem the most relevant. These salient features may include historical and physical data, diagnostic data, and the interpretation of diagnostic data. Each salient feature prompts a differential diagnosis. Consider a complete differential diagnosis for each feature. “If you don’t think of it, you’ll never diagnose it.”

    After listing all the potential diagnoses, begin to narrow the list. As in clinical medicine, one of two approaches often leads to a reasonable approximation of the final diagnosis. The first approach is to recognize the data as part of a syndrome. A syndrome is a constellation of signs, symptoms and diagnostic data related to another by some anatomic, physiologic or biochemical abnormality. Compare the differential diagnosis lists developed for each salient feature with each other. Occasionally, a common thread, or syndrome, is discovered. The table below illustrates this process:

    Differential diagnosis A Differential diagnosis B Differential diagnosis C Differential diagnosis D
    Disease A Disease F Disease B Disease W
    Disease B Disease I Disease Q Disease Z
    Disease C Disease P Disease T Disease M
    Disease D Disease R Disease O Disease X
    Disease E Disease B Disease K Disease B

    In this example, diagnosis “B” is on each list and may represent a syndrome. Most cases will not be so straightforward. Disease “B” may not be contained on every list or a second syndrome may be common to many lists. When more than one syndrome is possible, weigh each diagnostic possibility with respect to the presence of “syndrome defining” features. Successive approximation will suggest that one diagnosis is more probable than another is.

    The second approach weighs each potential diagnosis in terms of supporting or refuting data. Create a differential diagnosis list for each salient feature. Compare each list to find diseases common to one or more of them. The second example illustrates this process:

    Differential diagnosis A Differential diagnosis B Differential diagnosis C Differential diagnosis D
    Disease A Disease D Disease B Disease E
    Disease B Disease E Disease Q Disease Z
    Disease C Disease P Disease P Disease D
    Disease D Disease R Disease O Disease X
    Disease E Disease B Disease E Disease B


    In this example, diseases “B” and “E” are on every list, disease “D” is on three lists, and disease “P” is on two lists. All other diseases are found only one time. The diseases common among several lists represent the most probable diagnoses. Consider clinical and diagnostic data that increases or decreases the probability that a diagnosis is correct. This table illustrates that process:

      Data supporting The diagnosis Data not supporting The diagnosis
    Disease B + + + + + + + + + + + +
    Disease E + + + +
    Disease D + + + + + + +
    Disease P + + + + + + + + + +


    In this example, disease “D” seems more probable than other diseases. Although disease “B” and disease “E” appeared on every list, the weight of the data does not make the diagnosis probable. Some data is more specific and may weigh more than other softer data. The discussant logically weighs each potential diagnosis in terms of the data available to estimate a probability. The most probable diagnosis will be at the top of the final differential diagnosis list, the least probable at the bottom.

  3. Formatting the CPC discussion Various presentation formats are effective. Choose a presentation format that most suits your own thought process and communication style.
    The presentation format for the discussion could follow this general outline:
    Review of the salient features
    Differential diagnosis of the salient features
    Logical discussion of the potential diagnoses
    Presentation of the most likely diagnoses
    Potential confirmatory studies
    Final diagnosis (if possible).

    The discussion should take no longer than 10 minutes. Close attention to time is critical.


Good presentation skills are required of the case presenter and the case discussant. The participants must be well prepared and well-rehearsed. The time of each segment of the CPC is restricted. Always adhere to the time limits set for the competition. Speakers must be dressed appropriately and present themselves in a professional manner.

Avoid making crowded PowerPoint slides, spelling errors, including irrelevant artwork, and using distracting color schemes. Points are assigned for slide quality, so spend some time on format and arrangement!

Speakers must be engaging and enthusiastic. The audience expects the participants to avoid monotonous speech, mumbling, distracting mannerisms, meaningless phrases and interjections, and a motionless presentation. Humor may be a useful adjunct to the presentation but is used with caution. Do not tell inappropriate jokes or offend members of the audience.


The Research Poster Competition (RPC) is an opportunity for INDUS-EM Delegates to present their original research as a Poster Display. All forms of research relevant to the field of emergency medicine are acceptable, eg. clinical research, translational, operational, basic science, etc. Case reports are not accepted.

RPC is only open to registered delegates. After registering for WACEM2017, participants must submit an RPC abstract to emarcs2017@yahoo.com by the deadline. There will be late breakers till September 30th, 2017 11.59 LANKA Standard Time.

All original research abstracts received by the deadline will be invited for Poster Display. In addition, the EMARCS Research Committee will select the “top 5” highest scoring submissions for publication as abstracts in JETS, the Journal of Emergencies, Trauma & Shock. The scoring system used by the Committee is described below. Abstracts received after the deadline will not be eligible for scoring.

Research Committee Faculty will attend Poster Display at scheduled times to provide mentorship and feedback. In special circumstances, case reports and abstracts received after the deadline may be allowed Poster Display.

Rules & Regulations

Format :

Abstracts must adhere to all of the following rules:

  1. 250 word limit, including title and headings
  2. Structured with headings in bold: Background, Methods, Results, Discussion
  3. Include all authors names and affiliations
  4. Indicate the corresponding author, and provide his/her full name and email address
  5. Submit as Microsoft Word document, 12-point Times New Roman font, 1 inch margins


  1. Only original research may be submitted.
  2. Only abstracts in accordance with these format and content guidelines will be scored.
  3. The research must not have been published in a peer-reviewed journal prior to the meeting.
  4. Abstracts (or data) must not have been previously presented at national or international meetings prior to the first day of the INDUSEM Annual Meeting.

Poster Display

  1. Posters should provide more detailed information about the study, including: Title, Names & Affiliations of all Authors, Background, Study Objectives, Study Hypothesis (if applicable), Materials & Methods, Results, Discussion, Limitations, Future Directions, and Conclusion.
  2. Images and figures should be professionally rendered.
  3. Advertisements or images for which the authors do not hold proprietary rights may not be included
  4. Any sources of funding or potential conflicts of interest should be clearly indicated.
  5. In the case of Human Subjects Research, posters must include a statement describing the source of ethical review and approval (or exemption).
  6. Participants are responsible for hanging and taking down their posters before and after the conference.


Check Schedule for Display Time and Location. Presenter has to be besides their Posters during Lunch Hours

Original photographs of patients, pathology specimens, gram stains, EKGs, radiographic studies, or other visual data are invited for presentation at the INDUSEM Annual Congress. Submissions should depict findings that are (1) pathognomonic for a particular diagnosis relevant to the practice of emergency medicine, or (2) of unusual interest that have educational value. Accepted submissions will be mounted for display at the Congress, and entered into the “Pictorial Education Competition”.

No more than three different photos can be submitted for any one case. Submit one digital copy in JPEG or TIF format by email attachment (resolution of at least 640 x 480). Digital images of radiographs, other imaging studies or EKGs should also be submitted in digital format. The content of any email attaching a photo or other image should contain the contributor’s name, address, hospital or program, and email contact.

All photo or other image submissions must be accompanied by a brief case history written as an “unknown” (do NOT include the diagnosis) in the following format: 1) chief complaint, 2) history of present illness, 3) pertinent physical exam (other than what is depicted in the photo), 4) pertinent laboratory data, 5) one or two questions (maximum 2 questions) asking the viewer to identify the diagnosis or pertinent finding depicted in the image, 6) answer(s) to the questions listed in item 5 along with a brief discussion of the case, including an explanation of the findings in the photo, and 7) one to three bulleted take home points or “clinical pearls.” The entire case history (items 1-7 above) is limited to no more than 500 words. The case history for the photograph(s) must be submitted on the template below, including your electronic signature (see attached).

If accepted for display, WACEM reserves the right to edit the submitted case history.  Submissions will be selected based on their educational merit, relevance to emergency medicine, the quality of the photograph, the quality of the case history, and appropriateness for public display.   The Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock (JETS), the official journal of INDUSEM, may invite a limited number of displayed photos to be submitted to the journal for consideration of publication, with full credit given to the contributor(s). 

WACEM will retain the rights to use submitted photographs in future educational projects, with full credit given for the contribution.

Photographs must not have been published in a refereed journal prior to the Annual Meeting.

Patients should be appropriately masked in order to protect privacy.  If the face is visible in the photograph, a black bar should be placed over the eyes at a minimum to disguise identity.  Submitters must attest that written consent and release of responsibility have been obtained for all photos of patients (electronic signature required – see application for submission form below).  Written consent will not be required for submission of isolated diagnostic studies such as EKGs, radiographs, gram stains, etc. however all patient identifiers (name, age, medical record number) must be removed from the image prior to submission to be considered for presentation.

On Acceptance the Competitor has to prepare the Poster conveying all the Information pertaining to the Picture with the Picture Itself. When Final Posters are displayed at the summit they should be in “PORTRAIT” layout. The information flow should be uniform, i.e. either from top to bottom or from left to right, but not both. The Poster should be between 40-50 Inches Wide and between 40-44 Inches Tall. Font size of all letters should be at least not less than (2.5 cm high or 48 Font). Letters for text in the body of the poster should be legible for comfortable reading at a distance of 2 meters away.



For every correct answer to asked question there is a spot prize of One Thousand LKR.