That fourth reviewer, or tie breaker, is usually a seasoned reviewer who provides their own comments (stage 2 of the review process), which are then reviewed by the Scientifi c Program chairs (stage 3 of the review process).
“It’s a long process, but that’s because it is as equitable and fair as we can possibly make it,” said Dr. Madassery.
Step 3
The abstracts are selected Once all submissions are scored, the Annual Scientifi c Meeting Committee generally accepts those with the highest composite scores, and after taking reviewer comments highly into consideration. As Dr. Novelli noted, while there is a general goal for how many to accept, the numbers fl uctuate based on the scores of each abstract. According to Drs. Madassery and Novelli, the quality of research has steadily risen over the years, as has the quantity of submissions.
the review process). Abstract reviewers are volunteers, the majority of whom have been JVIR reviewers, and have been reviewing for the annual scientifi c meeting for years.
The full process is anonymous, with all identifying information removed. Reviewers manually report their confl icts of interest, and the abstract submission and review platform identifi es and changes reviewers based on any confl ict of interest before the review process has even begun.
“We really rely on our reviewers,” Dr. Novelli said. “Their comments, insight and expertise are crucial to selecting high-quality, impactful research.”
Each original scientifi c research abstract is given a score out of 10 and each educational exhibit a score out of 5 by each reviewer, and these three scores are then averaged.
“If there is a signifi cant discrepancy between scores, then we will send the abstract to a fourth reviewer,” said SIR 2026 Scientifi c Program chair Kumar Madassery, MD, FSIR.
“We received a wide fi eld of submissions, and we have some very exciting items that provide updates, novel approaches and new iterations on some established data,” said Dr. Madassery.
He also saw an increase in abstracts on growing areas like AI and robotics, as well as topics such as embolization for musculoskeletal disease.
“The SIR community is very diverse, and that is refl ected in the submissions we received,” said Dr. Novelli. “We are excited to showcase research from across the breadth of IR practice, regardless of clinical niche.”
Once abstracts are accepted, they are then assigned to either oral or poster presentations; this assignment is based upon the subject and nature of the abstracts accepted each year.
“The whole process is a collective, group eff ort,” Dr. Madassery said. “We rely not only on excellent submissions, but the expertise of our reviewers in order to bring the SIR community the best science possible.”
Dr. Madassery and Dr. Novelli said they were both extremely excited to share the submissions accepted this
Interested in more SIR 2026 science?
Check out the full educational programming schedule, live now on
sirmeeting.org.
irq.sirweb.org | 25
“ We received a wide fi eld of submissions, and we have some very exciting items that provide updates, novel approaches and new iterations on some
established data.” — Kumar Madassery, MD, FSIR SIR 2026 Scientifi c Program chair
year. Accepted authors have been notifi ed and the full scientifi c program, along with the Abstracts of the Year and featured abstracts are available online. SIR members will be able to access the accepted science in the JVIR supplement this spring, as well as live onsite at SIR 2026 in Toronto.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40
