RESUMEN

Background: Natural language processing tools are becoming increasingly adopted in multiple industries worldwide. They have shown promising results however their use in the field of surgery is under-recognised. Many trials have assessed these benefits in small settings with promising results before large scale adoption can be considered in surgery. This study aims to review the current research and insights into the potential for implementation of natural language processing tools into surgery. Methods: A narrative review was conducted following a computer-assisted literature search on Medline, EMBASE and Google Scholar databases. Papers related to natural language processing tools and consideration into their use for surgery were considered. Results: Current applications of natural language processing tools within surgery are limited. From the literature, there is evidence of potential improvement in surgical capability and service delivery, such as through the use of these technologies to streamline processes including surgical triaging, data collection and auditing, surgical communication and documentation. Additionally, there is potential to extend these capabilities to surgical academia to improve processes in surgical research and allow innovation in the development of educational resources. Despite these outcomes, the evidence to support these findings are challenged by small sample sizes with limited applicability to broader settings. Conclusion: With the increasing adoption of natural language processing technology, such as in popular forms like ChatGPT, there has been increasing research in the use of these tools within surgery to improve surgical workflow and efficiency. This review highlights multifaceted applications of natural language processing within surgery, albeit with clear limitations due to the infancy of the infrastructure available to leverage these technologies. There remains room for more rigorous research into broader capability of natural language processing technology within the field of surgery and the need for cross-sectoral collaboration to understand the ways in which these algorithms can best be integrated.

RESUMEN

Mini abstracts: Faculty at the Baylor College of Medicine have developed a flexible research collaborative through which students gain research skills and individualized mentorship. This division has produced 86 trainee first author publications, 64 manuscripts by 34 different medical students with an average Scimago Journal Rank of 1.293 (range: 1.035-1.551) since 2015.

RESUMEN

Research in surgery faces intrinsic difficulties such as the lack of reproducibility of surgical operations, self-referring surgeons, decentralized data. Establishing a community of qualified researchers across surgeons is crucial. Clinical networks have been proposed as solutions to many challenges in surgical research, yet their implementation remains uncommon, especially for surgical trialists. The extent of literature produced by networks remains unclear, but fostering such collaborations could enhance the overall quality of surgical research. We conducted review focusing on research networks in colorectal surgery to assess their workload and impact in the literature and identify factors contributing to their durability. Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched for articles published through research networks. Networks were categorized by subspecialty, and specific items were retrieved for further classification. A survey was administered to twenty experts in colorectal surgery or research networking. A total of 2490 manuscripts were screened, and 397 networks identified. Of these, 96 were colorectal networks contributing to 492 publications, with 28 networks having five or more publications. Seventeen networks were affiliated with International or National societies, and only 5 conducted both prospective trials and RCTs. Twenty networks reported national or population-based data, and 26 networks lasted for more than 5 years. Sixteen experts participated in the survey, with an 80 % compliance rate, and 12 of them have been involved in creating a surgical network. The large majority of experts advocate the establishment of guidelines for networks creation in the surgical community.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Purpose: Our goals were to characterize associations of author number, author gender, and institutional affiliation on ratings and acceptances of abstracts submitted to one surgical education conference over 5 years. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all abstracts submitted between 2017 and 2021 to the annual meeting of the Association for Surgical Education (ASE). Abstract data included average rater scores, acceptance status, author lists, and institutional affiliations. We cross-referenced last author affiliation with top-40 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded institutions and used a gender determination software to code first and last author genders. Results: We analyzed 1,162 abstracts. Higher reviewer scores demonstrated positive, weak associations with more authors [r(1160) = 0.191, p < 0.001] and institutions [r(1160) = 0.182, p < 0.001]. Significantly higher scores were noted for abstracts with last authors affiliated with top-40 NIH-funded institutions [4.18 (SD 0.96) vs. 3.72 (SD 1.12), p < 0.001]. Women were first authors (51.8%) (n = 602) and last authors (35.4%) (n = 411) of the time. Abstracts were rated significantly higher with women rather than men as first authors [3.98 (SD 0.99) vs. 3.82 (SD 1.12), p = 0.011] or last [4.01 (SD 1.04) vs. 3.82 (SD 1.10), p = 0.005]. Across all years, abstracts were accepted more often as podium or plenary presentations when submitted by women first [n = 279, 59.7% (p = 0.002)] or last [n = 183, 38.4% (p = 0.095)] authors. Conclusion: Abstracts whose last authors were affiliated with top-40 NIH-funded institutions received significantly higher scores, possibly indicating increased tangible or intangible resources contributing to research efforts. Abstracts with women first and last authors scored higher and were more frequently invited for plenary and podium presentations.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Social media (SoMe) is increasingly important in surgical education and may be necessary in the current learning environment. Whilst expanding in use and applications, few studies detail the impact of SoMe on measurable outcomes. The goal of this study was to quantify the impact of a dedicated SoMe strategy on engagement metrics for surgical research. METHODS: A retrospective review of a peer-reviewed surgical journal's Twitter microblog platform (@ColorectalDis) was performed from 6/2015 to 4/2021. A formal SoMe strategy was introduced in September 2018. Data were stratified into 2 time periods: pre-intervention (6-2015 to 9-2018) and post-SoMe intervention (9-2018 to 4-2021). The main outcome was the impact of the SoMe strategy on user engagement with the Twitter platform, journal, and traditional journal metrics. Twitter Analytics and Twitonomy were used to analyse engagement. RESULTS: From conception to analysis, the microblog published 1198 original tweets, generating 5 million impressions and 231,000 engagements. Increased account activity (increased tweets published per month-5.51 vs 28.79; p < 0.01) was associated with significant engagement growth, including new monthly followers (213 vs 38; p < 0.01) and interactions with posted articles (4,096,167 vs 269,152; p < 0.01). Article downloads increased twenty-fold post-SoMe intervention (210,449 vs 10,934; p < 0.01), with significant increases in traditional journal metrics of new subscribers (+11%), article submissions (+24%), and impact factor (+0.9) (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: SoMe directly impacts traditional journal metrics in surgical research. By examining the patterns of user engagement between SoMe and journal sites, the growing beneficial impact of a structured social media strategy and SoMe as an educational tool is demonstrated.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Vivien Thomas was born into humble beginnings in Iberia, Louisiana in 1910. The circumstances of that era prevented him from achieving his goal of attending medical school. He became a surgical research technician at Vanderbilt Medical School. While at Vanderbilt, he began working under Alfred Blalock, one of the famous surgeons of that era. When Blalock left Vanderbilt, he asked Thomas to come with him. At Hopkins, the surgical procedure known as the Blalock-Taussig Shunt was developed to treat a serious congenital heart defect known as Tetralogy of Fallot. Vivien Thomas was instrumental in the development of that procedure.

RESUMEN

Academic productivity is important for career advancement, yet not all trainees have access to structured research programs. Without formal teaching, acquiring practical skills for research can be challenging. A comprehensive research course that teaches practical skills to translate ideas into publications could accelerate trainees' productivity and liberate faculty mentors' time. We share our experience designing and teaching "A Practical Introduction to Academic Research", a course that teaches practical skills including building productive habits, recognizing common statistical pitfalls, writing cover letters, succinct manuscripts, responding to reviewers, and delivering effective presentations. We share open-source educational material used during the Winter 2022 iteration to facilitate curriculum adoption at peer institutions.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: To complete a culturally appropriate translation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Cervical Cancer module (QLQ-CX24) from English to Chichewa (one of the official languages of Malawi) in preparation for postsurgical outcomes research in rural Malawian cervical cancer patients. METHODS: Following the EORTC translation procedure manual, two distinct forward translations from English were reconciled into a preliminary Chichewa translation, followed by two distinct back-translations to English. The English back-translation was reconciled and the translation report sent for discussion and proofreading by EORTC; this was followed by pilot testing. All translators were physicians fluent in English and Chichewa. RESULTS: Of 24 questions in QLQ-CX24, three had prior translations available; all three required revision to clarify tense or wording. Three discussion exchanges with EORTC refined the translation and ensured faithfulness to the original English meaning; proofreaders contributed minor changes. Pilot testing was completed on 10 female patients (three with cervical cancer, four suspicious cervical lesions, and three screening only). Three patients were illiterate. During pilot testing, translation of question 46 (Q46) was misunderstood as referring to vaginal discharge instead of feeling "feminine". The remaining questions were understood, with minor feedback for six questions. Final revision of Q46 yielded a phrase describing "feminine" as "appearance or activities as a woman". Concepts comparable to "feminine" were absent in the Chichewa language/regional Malawian culture. The final revision of Q46 was pilot-tested on five patients (three illiterate) and found acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: Translation of the QLQ-CX24 module was completed successfully and revealed absence of the modern concept of femininity in Chichewa language and regional Malawian culture. Care should be taken when creating and translating healthcare-related documents for surgical research to ensure broad applicability across cultures.

RESUMEN

Plastic surgery is a specialized field of medicine that focuses on reconstructing, restoring, or enhancing a person's appearance through surgical procedures. Over the years, data science has become increasingly relevant in this domain, offering valuable insights and innovations that can improve patient outcomes, enhance surgical techniques, and drive advancements in the field. Data science has revolutionized the field of plastic surgery by providing valuable insights, predictive models, and innovative tools that enhance surgical planning, patient outcomes, and research advancements.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: There continues to be a growing demand for military-civilian partnerships (MCPs) in research collaborations developing medical trauma care in domestic and international affairs. The objective of this comprehensive review is to investigate the difference in the quantity of MCP trauma and critical care publications before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed for the calendar years 2018 and 2021 utilizing MEDLINE, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we performed a three-tiered review of 603 English language articles to identify trauma-related military and/or civilian partners and describe the changes in geographical relationships. RESULTS: A total of 96 (2018) and 119 (2021) articles met screening criteria for trauma and critical care studies and were used for final data extraction. Ultimately, 59 (2018) and 71 (2021) papers met the inclusion criteria of identifying trauma/critical care MCPs and identified both military and civilian partners. There was also an increase from 10 (2018) to 17 (2021) publications that mentioned advocacy for MCP. Using the author affiliations, four regional MCP types were recorded: of 2018 articles, locoregional (3.4%), US-national (47.5%), single international country (42.4%), and between multiple countries (6.8%); of 2021 articles, locoregional (15.5%), US-national (38%), single international country (29.6%), and between multiple countries (16.9%). There has been an increase in the number of locoregional and multinational MCPs and an overall increase in the number of collaborative trauma publications and MCP advocacy papers. A national geographical heat map was developed to illustrate the changes from 2018 to 2021. CONCLUSIONS: There has been an increase in the number of recorded trauma and critical care MCP publications post-pandemic. The growth in the number of manuscripts in more regions post-pandemic suggests an increase in the recognition of collaborations that contribute not only to conflict readiness but also advancements in trauma and surgical care.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The incidence of courtesy authorship in research over time has probably increased due to the enormous pressure to publish to increase the bibliometric indexes necessary to achieve an academic role. The aim of this survey was to quantify and characterize this research malpractice among a very selected group of surgeons from different surgical specialties belonging to the European Association of Surgery (ESA). E-mail addresses for the invitation to take part to the survey were collected by the Twenty-eighth Annual Meeting final program. Five-item were designed and developed by the authors using an online platform. Eighty-six members from 21 countries completed the survey (female/male ratio: 0.09). In the last 10 years, almost half of the responders (41, 47.7%, 37 academics) have included colleagues for courtesy authorship. The most common reason of courtesy authorships was to support the academic career of another researcher (62.5%). Other reasons were fear of retaliation (12.5%), reciprocal authorship (12.5%) or support for a partner (10%). This survey showed that undeserved authorship is sadly confirmed to be a common research misconduct across any countries and medical specialties, even among a very selected group of surgeons with international reputation irrespective of the academic position.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Malignant melanoma is a highly aggressive tumor, and lymph node metastasis significantly impacts the prognosis and treatment of this condition. Sentinel node biopsy, as a less invasive alternative to traditional dissection, offers convenience, safety, and improved efficiency in assessing local lymph node status. It provides valuable staging information and aids in determining appropriate follow-up treatment. The evolution and enhancement of technical and conceptual aspects associated with sentinel node biopsy have transformed the management of malignant melanoma. Notably, several large multicenter trials have challenged the necessity of complete lymph node dissection, leading to a paradigm shift. While some controversy remains, the standard of care for melanoma is progressing toward a consensus.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is an essential source of funding for vascular surgeons conducting research. NIH funding is frequently used to benchmark institutional and individual research productivity, help determine eligibility for academic promotion, and as a measure of scientific quality. We sought to appraise the current scope of NIH funding to vascular surgeons by appraising the characteristics of NIH-funded investigators and projects. In addition, we also sought to determine whether funded grants addressed recent Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) research priorities. METHODS: In April 2022, we queried the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results (RePORTER) database for active projects. We only included projects that had a vascular surgeon as a principal investigator. Grant characteristics were extracted from the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results database. Principal investigator demographics and academic background information were identified by searching institution profiles. RESULTS: There were 55 active NIH awards given to 41 vascular surgeons. Only 1% (41/4037) of all vascular surgeons in the United States receive NIH funding. Funded vascular surgeons are an average of 16.3 years out of training; 37% (n = 15) are women. The majority of awards (58%; n = 32) were R01 grants. Among the active NIH-funded projects, 75% (n = 41) are basic or translational research projects, and 25% (n = 14) are clinical or health services research projects. Abdominal aortic aneurysm and peripheral arterial disease are the most commonly funded disease areas and together accounted for 54% (n = 30) of projects. Three SVS research priorities are not addressed by any of the current NIH-funded projects. CONCLUSIONS: NIH funding of vascular surgeons is rare and predominantly consists of basic or translational science projects focused on abdominal aortic aneurysm and peripheral arterial disease research. Women are well-represented among funded vascular surgeons. Although the majority of SVS research priorities receive NIH funding, three SVS research priorities are yet to be addressed by NIH-funded projects. Future efforts should focus on increasing the number of vascular surgeons receiving NIH grants and ensuring all SVS research priorities receive NIH funding.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Systematic collection and analysis of surgical outcomes data is a cornerstone of surgical quality improvement. Unfortunately, there remains a dearth of surgical outcomes data from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To improve surgical outcomes in LMICs, it is essential to have the ability to collect, analyze, and report risk-adjusted postoperative morbidity and mortality data. This study aimed to review the barriers and challenges to developing perioperative registries in LMIC settings. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of all published literature on barriers to conducting surgical outcomes research in LMICs using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and GoogleScholar. Keywords included 'surgery', 'outcomes research', 'registries', 'barriers', and synonymous Medical Subject Headings derivatives. Articles found were subsequently reference-mined. All relevant original research and reviews published between 2000 and 2021 were included. The performance of routine information system management framework was used to organize identified barriers into technical, organizational, or behavioral factors. RESULTS: Twelve articles were identified in our search. Ten articles focused specifically on the creation, success, and obstacles faced during the implementation of trauma registries. Technical factors reported by 50% of the articles included limited access to a digital platform for data entry, lack of standardization of forms, and complexity of said forms. 91.7% articles mentioned organizational factors, including the availability of resources, financial constraints, human resources, and lack of consistent electricity. Behavioral factors highlighted by 66.6% of the studies included lack of team commitment, job constraints, and clinical burden, which contributed to poor compliance and dwindling data collection over time. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of published literature on barriers to developing and maintaining perioperative registries in LMICs. There is an immediate need to study and understand barriers and facilitators to the continuous collection of surgical outcomes in LMICs.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: NIH funding to departments of surgery reported as benchmark Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research (BRIMR) rankings are unclear. METHODS: We analyzed inflation-adjusted BRIMR-reported NIH funding to departments of surgery and medicine between 2011 and 2021. RESULTS: NIH funding to departments of surgery and medicine both increased 40% from 2011 to 2021 ($325 million to $454 million; $3.8 billion to $5.3 billion, P < 0.001 for both). The number of BRIMR-ranked departments of surgery decreased 14% during this period while departments of medicine increased 5% (88 to 76 versus 111 to 116; P < 0.001). There was a greater increase in the total number of medicine PIs versus surgery PIs during this period (4377 to 5224 versus 557 to 649; P < 0.001). These trends translated to further concentration of NIH-funded PIs in medicine versus surgery departments (45 PIs/program versus 8.5 PIs/program; P < 0.001). NIH funding and PIs/program in 2021 were respectively 32 and 20 times greater for the top versus lowest 15 BRIMR-ranked surgery departments ($244 million versus $7.5 million [P < 0.01]; 20.5 versus 1.3 [P < 0.001]). Twelve (80%) of the top 15 surgery departments maintained this ranking over the 10-year study period. CONCLUSIONS: Although NIH funding to departments of surgery and medicine is growing at a similar rate, departments of medicine and top-funded surgery departments have greater funding and concentration of PIs/program versus surgery departments overall and lowest-funded surgery departments. Strategies used by top-performing departments to obtain and maintain funding may assist less well-funded departments in obtaining extramural research funding, thus broadening the access of surgeon-scientists to perform NIH-supported research.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: While impact factor (IF) remains the "gold standard" metric for journal quality, newer metrics are gaining popularity. These include the H5-index and journal Altmetric Attention Score (AAS). We explored the relationship between the IF, H5-index, and AAS for core general surgery (GS) and subspecialty journals. METHODS: For all GS and subspecialty journals with a Clarivate IF, H5-index (January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021) and journal AAS were obtained. Journal Twitter presence and activity was sourced from Twitter and the Twitter application programming interface. Spearman's correlations were assessed for numeric variables. RESULTS: A total of 105 journals were included, around half (49/105; 46.7%) of which were core GS journals. Median IF was 2.48 and median H5-index 19. Journal IF demonstrated a strong correlation with H5-index overall (r = 0.81), though this ranged from r = 0.95 (P < 0.01) for vascular surgery to r = 0.77 (P < 0.01) for plastic surgery journals. AAS was moderately correlated with the IF and H5-index (r = 0.59 and 0.62, respectively; both P < 0.01). R2 values ranging indicated that 66% of the variation in the H5-index and 35% of the variation in AAS was explained by the IF. Just over half the journals had a Twitter account (54/105; 51.4%). Journals with a Twitter account also had a significantly higher IF, H5-index, and AAS than those without a Twitter account (all P < 0.01). AAS was moderately correlated with Twitter activity (r = 0.59) and Twitter followers (r = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Across GS and subspecialty journals, journal IF correlates strongly with the H5-index and moderately with AAS. However, only 35% of variation in AAS and 66% of variation in the H5-index is explained by the IF, indicating that these metrics measure unique aspects of journal quality. The future growth of surgical journals should be geared towards improving across multiple metrics, including both the conventional and the contemporary, while leveraging social media to improve readership and eventual academic impact.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: To explore gender discrepancies in publications at general surgery departments, we performed a cross-sectional comparing the number of women and men at each academic rank and their number of first author (FA), middle author (MA), last author (LA), and total publications. METHODS: Thirty academic general surgery departments were randomly selected. For each faculty, we tabulated: first, middle, last names, gender, academic rank, educational leadership, year of medical school graduation, and additional graduate degrees. Bibliography, H-index, and citations were downloaded from the Scopus database. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred twenty-six faculty sampled, 881 (66.4%) men and 445 (33.5%) women. Men outnumbered women at all ranks, with increasing disparity at higher ranks. Men outnumbered women in all subspecialties-largest difference in transplant surgery (84.4% versus 15.6%, P < 0.001). Men at all ranks had more MA publications: assistant professor (rate ratio 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.43, P = 0.024), associate professor (1.65; 1.31-2.06, P < 0.001), and professor (1.50; 1.20-1.91, P = 0.008). Men associate professors had more LA publications (1.74; 1.34-2.37, P < 0.001). No differences found in FA publications at any rank, nor LA publications at assistant professor and professor ranks. At subspecialty level, men in surgical oncology (1.95; 1.55-2.45, P < 0.001) and transplant surgery (1.70; 1.09-2.66, P = 0.02) had more MA publications. CONCLUSIONS: While FA and LA publications did not differ significantly across genders, the largest difference lies in MA publications, beginning at junior ranks and persisting with seniority. Discrepancies in MA publications may reflect gender discrepancies in collaborative opportunities, hence total publications should be used cautiously when determining academic productivity.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Machine learning, a subtype of artificial intelligence, is an emerging field of surgical research dedicated to predictive modeling. From its inception, machine learning has been of interest in medical and surgical research. Built on traditional research metrics for optimal success, avenues of research include diagnostics, prognosis, operative timing, and surgical education, in a variety of surgical subspecialties. Machine learning represents an exciting and developing future in the world of surgical research that will not only allow for more personalized and comprehensive medical care.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: We evaluate National Institutes of Health (NIH) data to describe endocrine surgical research performed by surgeons in the United States. METHODS: An internal NIH database was queried for endocrine surgery-related grants awarded to surgeons in 2010, 2015, and 2020. The grants were then compared based on cost, grant type, research type, and endocrine topic. RESULTS: Eighteen grants ($6.4 M) focused on endocrine surgery-related research topics were identified in 2020, 17 ($7.3 M) in 2015, and 11 ($3.8 M) in 2010. In 2020, 14 grants were basic science and 4 were clinical outcomes, and pancreatic endocrine disease and thyroid disease each comprised 6 grants. R01 and R21 grants comprised 10 (55.6%) of the grants in 2020, compared to 10 (58.5%) in 2015 and 8 (72.7%) in 2010, while K08 and K23 grants increased to 4 (22.2%) in 2020 from 2 (11.8%) in 2015 and none in 2010. CONCLUSION: There were more K-awards focused on endocrine surgery-related research in 2020 compared to 2015 and 2010, suggesting the pipeline is growing.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Authorship of surgical literature is important for the career advancement of surgeons, and gender disparities in authorship may hinder the representation and leadership of women within academic surgery. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the gender distribution of first, senior, and overall authorship in peer-reviewed surgical journal studies across all surgical specialties to determine if disparities exist. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases were searched for studies investigating the gender distribution of authorship of surgical literature published before December 10th, 2021. Meta-analysis was performed and Cohen's Q test for heterogenous effects was used to determine whether random or fixed-effects models were appropriate. RESULTS: Fifteen studies investigating gender distribution of authorship met inclusion, which included a total of 136,627 pooled studies. The meta-analysis demonstrated the meta-proportion of first authorship for women to be 20.6% (95% CI: 13.9, 28.2), the meta-proportion of senior authorship for women to be 11.9% (95% CI: 6.6, 18.5), and the meta-proportion of overall authorship for women to be 23% (95% CI: 16.2, 30.7). In addition, the proportion of senior authorship for women was found to be significantly lower than the proportion of overall authorship for women (11.9% versus 23.0%, P = .0106). CONCLUSION: There is a significantly smaller proportion of women who are first, senior, and overall authors in surgical literature compared to their colleagues who are men. Sustainable and effective solutions aimed at improving the representation of women surgeons in surgical research and research leadership are necessary.

Asunto(s)