Why it exists
A perfect conference can be impossible
FAPDF — the research support foundation of the Federal District — pays for researchers to attend conferences. The money exists, but the path to it has two locks that trip up almost everyone, and almost nobody sees the second one in time.
1. The window closes before the event
Submissions to the call happen in windows, defined by the month in which the conference starts. Each window closes months before the event. Once the date has passed, that conference is out — there is no appeal, only the next call.
2. The acceptance letter is required at submission
It is not enough for the conference to fall within the window: the letter accepting your work must be in hand when you submit to the call. In other words, the conference has to say it accepted the abstract before the window closes — and most say so afterwards.
It is this second lock that makes the Radar exist. A conference can be ideal for the group, fall in the right window, and still be impossible, because its answer arrives too late. It has happened: a conference aligned with the group's work had its poster call open until two days after the window closed. Two days — and the semester's slot was gone.
How it works
Two filters, one verdict
The Radar runs a sweep, compares all the conferences it finds, and puts each through two questions. Universities, scientific societies, and international networks are assessed on the same level.
Sweeps the calls
Gathers conferences with an open or expected call, from all the fields in which the group publishes — primary care, medical education, public health, nursing, global health.
Test the fit
Checks whether the conference falls in an open window and whether the acceptance letter arrives before it closes. This is the question that separates the possible from the impossible.
Scores by the rubric
Applies the call's points rubric to each conference, to show which are worth more when you must choose between two that fit.
What each verdict means
Every row of the dashboard ends in one of these six words. They are the product: they say what to do with that conference this week.
It falls within the window, and the acceptance arrives in time. This is where it is worth spending the effort to submit now.
It works, but with no margin: the acceptance comes too close to the closing. It is fine if there is no better alternative — and needs close monitoring.
The conference would serve, but the dates don't line up. Usually because acceptance comes after the window.
A good target, at the wrong time. It is recorded for the next round, with the deadline already noted.
Does not meet the call's conditions — by date, format, or type of event.
Worth attending, but by another route: without depending on this call.
How points are counted
The call scores each request, and the Radar redoes that calculation for every conference on the list. There are 150 points at most, split into two very different halves: one that depends on the conference, and another that depends on who submits.
The conference — up to 110 points
How many editions it has had, whether it is regional, national, or international, and in what format the work is published — from a one-page abstract to a full article.
Who submits — up to 40 points
Whether the presentation is a poster or oral, and how many full articles the person published in the previous year. This is the half you can improve before submitting.
This separation has a practical consequence that the dashboard explores in a section of its own: when two conferences tie, what decides is not the conference — it is the choice to request an oral presentation instead of a poster, and the accepted publication format. These are the points in the hands of whoever submits.
What you find on the dashboard
The Radar is not a spreadsheet of conferences: it is a reading of the week, with the recommendation at the top and the detail below, for anyone who wants to check.
Verdict of the week
A short text at the top with what changed, what was lost, and what the priority action is — the conference to submit to now, and why.
Indicators
How many conferences were compared, how many fit, how many are borderline, and how many days remain until each window closes.
Calendar of windows
All the call's windows, with the closing date and status of each — closed or open, with the days remaining.
Target table
All the conferences in one table: location, date, field, edition, abstract deadline, when acceptance comes out, score, and verdict.
Coverage and charts
Where the conferences came from, by field and by continent, and the distribution of verdicts — to see what the sweep reached and what was left out.
Scoring strategy
The levers that raise a request's score, with the calculation of how much each yields: the publication format, oral presentation, and the previous year's articles.
Open the Radar
The dashboard is public and requires no sign-up. It is maintained by the Escola de Pacientes research group and updated with each sweep — the date of the latest one appears in the title itself.
