Abstract
The quality of posters at pharmacy conferences can vary. We created a mixed-approach rubric (MAR) for poster quality. Evidence from multiple sources (systematic review, further analysis of rater scores, verbal feedback from raters) showed the need to slightly modify that MAR, which we accomplished. Our objectives here were to re-evaluate scoring using this revised MAR (rMAR) and to further examine the attributes of lower-quality versus higher-quality posters. Two faculty raters independently scored each poster using the rMAR for recent posters presented at a pharmacy education conference. The Rasch Measurement Model provided psychometric evidence and poster-quality measures. These measures were then linear-regressed with attributes of logical sequencing, QR-code presence/use, submission abstract presence, and wordiness. Moreover, Traditional vs. Contemporary poster formats were compared. Raters scored 642 posters (267 from 2023, 375 from 2024). The Rasch Measurement Model showed a distinct separation of posters into lower quality versus higher quality. The rMAR's rating scale continued to function well (like the original MAR had) among multiple raters. Poster-quality measures were significantly positive when linearly regressed with logical sequencing, QR-code presence/use, absence of submission abstract, and decreased wordiness. Moreover, Contemporary poster formats (either Persky-style or Billboard-style) were higher quality on average than Traditional poster formats. This evidence-based rMAR showed a helpful validation of poster-quality scores. Regression confirmed findings from the initial MAR (before revision), and choice of poster format proved a notable decision affecting poster quality.