Critical Review of Manuscripts

CME Credit Hours: 2
Registration is Required (Complimentary)

Limit: 100 participants (Sold Out)

A portion of this workshop will be live for interaction with the faculty.

The peer review process is central to the continued advancement of surgical knowledge. Continuous critical review of new manuscripts ensures the best available evidence is disseminated within the surgical community. The volume of new material, the complexity of trial design and the increasingly nuanced conclusions require detailed and systematic critical review.
 
This symposium is aimed at three groups: present and prospective reviewers for Diseases of the Colon & Rectum (DC&R), the practicing surgeon who wants to increase their critical appraisal skills and authors who wish to improve their writing skills. It is designed to be hands on. Through an interactive symposium, we will explore the most common study methodologies, identify appropriate questions for each method, while identifying the advantages, the disadvantages and the common mistakes in study conduct, reporting and conclusions. We will also explore essential resources for additional learning in this area.
 
Previously published representative papers from the four common methodologies will be identified in advance from Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. Six weeks prior to the symposium, the originally submitted unedited manuscripts of these four papers will be distributed to each symposium participant who will have the chance to read and critique them as if they were primary reviewers. During the symposium, each participant will be assigned to a small group led by an editorial board member from DC&R. Following an introduction of the manuscript by the faculty, the editorial board members will facilitate a working discussion and critique of each manuscript within the small groups. Board members will have access to the original editorial comments and the changes that were requested by the editors prior to publication to enhance the discussion. The benefit to each individual participant will be maximized with appropriate preparation time prior to the symposium.

Objectives

At the conclusion of this session, participants should be able to:

1. Recognize patient scenarios where observational studies are appropriate and can potentially provide strong evidence
2. Identify the advantages, limitations and proper use of studies using administrative databases
3. Recognize the potential for bias and methodological limitations involving randomized controlled trials
4. Recall the components of a valuable comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis
5. Apply resources to enhance their critical appraisal skills

Co-Directors

Susan Galandiuk, MD, Louisville, KY
David Stewart, MD, Tucson, AZ

Introduction
Susan Galandiuk, MD, Louisville, KY

Observational Studies
Matthew Z. Wilson, MD, Lebanon, NH               

Administrative Database Studies
Kristen Crowell, MD, Boston, MA

Randomized Controlled Trials
Willem Bemelman, MD, PhD, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses
Husein Moloo, MD, MBA, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Table Group Discussions - Observational Study

Table Group Discussions - Administrative Database Study

Table Group Discussions - Randomized Controlled Trial

Table Group Discussions - Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analysis

Adjourn