This year's ISMRM abstract announcement came a week earlier than usual. In my count, about 143 x 36 = 5148 abstracts were accepted, as compared to 141 x 38= 5358 last year. I see submission numbers going beyond 8600 so the acceptance rate is perhaps about 60%, quite low compared to the past. The question of fairness and transparency naturally arises as more people get rejection -- prominently missing any explanation. When Dr. Derek Jones, now president of ISMRM, visited us last year I did ask about providing some kind of scores or justification for abstract decisions. He was under impression that rejected ones are of obvious low quality, and the question may be more on oral vs posters. I think this position needs re-visiting, as (i) the field is getting ever more diversified, making judgement of others' work difficult, and (ii) unlike APS, for example, ISMRM abstract submission requires considerable manual work (on formatting) so the rejected authors deserve some sort of feedback at the minimum.
Personally, two first-authored abstracts were accepted for digital posters as requested. They both involve eddy current. Video recording should happen in the next several weeks. More on that part later!
