Cluster randomised trial, 20 clinics
Clinical trial poster
A clinical trial poster has to show who was randomised, what happened to them and how big the effect was, in that order. This A0 portrait example reports a fictional cluster randomised trial of text message reminders for childhood vaccination across 20 clinics, with an abstract, methods as a labelled protocol, a six box participant flow, three key numbers, two numbered charts and a comparison bar block.
The whole board
The poster at full size, exactly as it prints. Every number, citation and caption on it was written for this example, so the layout is being judged on real content.
Block by block
What each block on the board is for, in the order a reader walks it.
- Title band and authors
- The full study title runs across the band with the institution mark on the left, and it states the result rather than the topic: text message reminders raise childhood vaccination completion. Four authors from three affiliations follow, with superscripts generated from the affiliation list, so moving an author never leaves a stale number behind.
- Abstract and introduction
- The abstract gives the problem, the intervention, the design and the enrolment: twenty clinics randomised ten and ten, and 1,980 mother and infant pairs. The introduction states the gap in two sentences: first dose coverage above 90 percent, completion of the full schedule below 65, and caregivers who say they meant to return but lost track of the date.
- Methods as a labelled protocol
- Five labelled entries cover design, participants, intervention, comparator and outcome. The outcome entry says completion was verified against the clinic register by an assessor blind to allocation, which is the sentence a trial reviewer looks for first and the one most often missing from a methods paragraph.
- Three key numbers
- The results row carries 82.4 percent completed with reminders, 61.2 percent with usual care, and a 21.2 point difference with its 95 percent interval of 15.9 to 26.5 and p below 0.001. The two arm blocks print 765 of 928 and 559 of 914, the analysed count per arm, and 928 plus 914 is the 1,842 the flow analyses at 14 months. The primary outcome sentence says the same base, so the 138 lost to follow up sit outside every percentage.
- Participant flow
- A six box spine runs top to bottom: 26 clinics assessed, 6 without a register branching to the side, 20 clinics randomised, 1,980 pairs enrolled, 138 lost to follow up and 1,842 analysed at 14 months. Each step subtracts cleanly, and the arm blocks above it divide by the same 1,842.
- Figures and the comparison bars
- Figure 1 charts completion by arm at each of the four doses, and Figure 2 charts the difference in completion by distance from the clinic, under 5 km, 5 to 10 km and over 10 km. A comparison block beside them sets the two arms against each other at dose three, 88.7 against 71.5, and dose four, 82.4 against 61.2. Figure 1's caption names the analysed base rather than promising error bars the chart block cannot draw.
- Discussion, contributions and future work
- The discussion is a single sentence, the contributions block claims the first cluster randomised test of dose level reminders in the region with register verified outcomes, and future work plans a twelve month follow up across six districts with a cost per completed schedule. On your board, give the discussion room for at least one limitation.
- Conclusion, acknowledgements and references
- The conclusion gives the 21 point effect, a cost of about $0.34 per child and the larger benefit far from a clinic. The acknowledgements name the funder and grant and say the funder had no role in the analysis. The three references are invented for this fictional study, because the layout carries a reference block; replace them with real sources.
- How to adapt this board
- Swap the two arms for yours and keep the difference as the third key number, because a reader looks for the effect before anything else. Use one denominator everywhere: if the flow ends at the analysed count, the arm blocks should divide by the analysed count in each arm, or say plainly that missing outcomes were counted as not completed. Put intervals in the caption text, since the chart block cannot draw them, and add your trial registration number to the acknowledgements.
What makes this board work
The flow subtracts cleanly
26 clinics assessed, 6 excluded, 20 randomised, 1,980 enrolled, 138 lost and 1,842 analysed. A reader who checks the arithmetic finds each step holds, which is the first thing a reviewer at a poster session does. The next check holds too: the arm blocks divide by 928 and 914, which add to the 1,842 analysed.
Methods is a protocol, not prose
Design, Participants, Intervention, Comparator and Outcome each get a bold label and one sentence. Nobody standing at a board reads a method paragraph, and the labelled form lets a reader jump straight to the one thing they came to check, here the blinded assessor.
The effect carries its interval
The difference block prints the 21.2 point effect with its 95 percent interval and p value underneath, and the arm blocks print their counts. A headline percentage with no count and no interval is the most common fault on a real poster board.
Questions people ask
What has to be on a clinical trial poster?
Title, authors and affiliations, abstract, methods, a participant flow diagram, the primary outcome with its confidence interval, figures with captions, discussion, conclusion and references. Registration number and funding usually sit in the acknowledgements. This board carries all of them except a registration number, which a real trial poster should add.
Do I need a CONSORT diagram on a poster?
For a randomised trial, yes. Reviewers look for it, and it answers who was excluded and lost in less space than a paragraph. For a cluster trial, the CONSORT cluster extension asks for counts at both levels, clinics and participants, which is why this flow starts with clinics and ends with pairs analysed.
Should arm percentages use enrolled or analysed counts?
Either can be right, but the board must say which and use it everywhere. This board uses analysed counts, 928 and 914 per arm, which add to the 1,842 at the foot of its flow, and says so in the primary outcome line. If you count missing outcomes as incomplete instead, divide by enrolled and say that.
What if a chart needs confidence intervals?
Print them in the caption or the results text. The poster chart block draws bars, lines and other kinds from ten chart types, but it does not draw error bars, so a caption that promises them describes something a reader cannot see. Write the interval for each arm into the caption instead.
Where do the trial registration and funder go?
In the acknowledgements block at the foot of the column, one line each: the registry name with the id, then the funder and grant number. They are not results, so they do not belong in the results zone, but a reviewer expects to find them without hunting. This board names the funder and grant but no registry id.
Can the CONSORT flow show more than six boxes?
Not on this layout. Its flow block has six nodes, one of which is an aside for exclusions. Fold the reasons for exclusion into that aside with counts separated by commas, and keep the main path short: assessed, randomised, enrolled, lost and analysed, which is exactly how this board spends its six.
Build your own in about a minute
The button below opens the generator with this use case already described. Change the wording to match your own, generate, then edit anything you like.
Make one like thisOther poster examples
Nursing research poster
A ward based trial of four hourly against two hourly repositioning on high specification foam, laid out as an A0 landscape board in four columns. It reports both outcomes a nursing trial has to report: whether patients were harmed, and how much nursing time the change gives back.
Randomised controlled trial poster example
A randomised controlled trial poster must let a reader follow every participant and find the primary outcome with its interval. This A0 portrait board reports a behavioural trial of a sleep app against written advice in 240 adults: insomnia scores fell 3.3 points more with the app, 95% CI 1.9 to 4.7, with the flow from 318 screened to 221 analysed.
Lab research poster
A lab research poster earns trust with its controls, its replicate counts and its willingness to print the doses where nothing happened. This A0 portrait example gives one dose response line chart most of the canvas, states the null results at 5 and 10 micrograms per millilitre as findings, and keeps the positive control on the same axes.
Want the steps in the builder? Read Add charts and diagrams, then choose the template, theme and size. For everything this generator can do, see the poster maker.
Written and checked by the OneCraft team. Last checked .