Mimi R. Borrelli

The STROCSS statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery

INTRODUCTIONnThe development of reporting guidelines over the past 20 years represents a major advance in scholarly publishing with recent evidence showing positive impacts. Whilst over 350 reporting guidelines exist, there are few that are specific to surgery. Here we describe the development of the STROCSS guideline (Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery).nnnMETHODS AND ANALYSISnWe published our protocol apriori. Current guidelines for case series (PROCESS), cohort studies (STROBE) and randomised controlled trials (CONSORT) were analysed to compile a list of items which were used as baseline material for developing a suitable checklist for surgical cohort guidelines. These were then put forward in a Delphi consensus exercise to an expert panel of 74 surgeons and academics via Google Forms.nnnRESULTSnThe Delphi exercise was completed by 62% (46/74) of the participants. All the items were passed in a single round to create a STROCSS guideline consisting of 17 items.nnnCONCLUSIONnWe present the STROCSS guideline for surgical cohort, cross-sectional and case-control studies consisting of a 17-item checklist. We hope its use will increase the transparency and reporting quality of such studies. This guideline is also suitable for cross-sectional and case control studies. We encourage authors, reviewers, journal editors and publishers to adopt these guidelines.

A protocol for the development of the STROCSS guideline: Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery

Highlights • No guidelines currently exist to support authors reporting on surgical cohort studies.• We hereby provide our protocol for the development of the STROCSS Guideline for surgical cohort studies.• Dissemination to interested parties and journals will be encouraged to endorse the reporting guideline.

Impact of the PROCESS guideline on the reporting of surgical case series: A before and after study

INTRODUCTIONnThe PROCESS guideline was developed in 2016 through expert Delphi consensus. It aimed to improve the quality of reporting of surgical case series. This study assessed the impact of the introduction of the PROCESS guideline on reporting for surgical case series submitted to three journals.nnnMETHODSn20 case series published in the International Journal of Surgery Case Reports (IJSCR), the International Journal of Surgery (IJS) or the Annals of Medicine and Surgery (AMS) in September to December 2016, prior to the introduction of the PROCESS guideline (the pre-PROCESS period), were randomly identified and scored against the PROCESS criteria. Two authors independently scored each article a total score out of 29, the PROCESS score (expressed as a percentage). Scores for the two researchers were compared and consensus was reached to achieve a final score set. The process was repeated for the January 2017 to April 2017 issues of the three journals, post PROCESS implementation (the post-PROCESS period).nnnRESULTSnThe mean PROCESS score was 80% (range 66-90%) for the pre-PROCESS period and 84% (range 72-95%) for the post-PROCESS period, a 4% relative increase [STATS]. The Cohens Kappa score between researchers was 0.907 implying very substantial agreement.nnnCONCLUSIONnImplementation of the PROCESS guideline resulted in a 5% improvement in the reporting quality of surgical case series published in three journals. Further research is needed to identify and successfully navigate existing barriers to greater compliance. Authors, reviewers and editors should adhere to the guidelines to boost reporting quality. Journals should develop their policies and guide for authors to incorporate the guideline and mandate compliance.

The SCARE 2018 Statement: Updating Consensus Surgical CAse REport (SCARE) Guidelines

INTRODUCTIONnThe SCARE Guidelines were published in 2016 to provide a structure for reporting surgical case reports. Since their publication, SCARE guidelines have been widely endorsed by authors, journal editors, and reviewers, and have helped to improve reporting transparency of case reports across a range of surgical specialties. In order to encourage further progress in reporting quality, the SCARE guidelines must themselves be kept up to date. We completed a Delphi consensus exercise to update the SCARE guidelines.nnnMETHODSnA Delphi consensus exercise was undertaken. All members of the previous Delphi group were invited to participate, in addition to researchers who have previously studied case reports, and editors from the International Journal of Surgery Case Reports. The expert group was sent an online questionnaire where they were asked to rate their agreement with proposed changes to each of the 24 items.nnnRESULTSn56 people agreed to participate and 45 (80%) invitees completed the survey which put forward modifications to the original guideline. The collated responses resulted in modifications. There was high agreement amongst the expert group.nnnCONCLUSIONnA modified and improved SCARE checklist is presented, after a Delphi consensus exercise was completed. The SCARE 2018 Statement: Updating Consensus Surgical CAse REport (SCARE) Guidelines.

How to apply for the academic foundation programme

The UK Academic Foundation Programme (AFP) is a two-year foundation programme that includes an additional “academic theme” undertaking work in research, management/leadership, or education and teaching activities. The limited number of AFP places makes the AFP application a highly competitive process. This article outlines points to consider when applying for the AFP and successful application strategies. Reviewed by successful AFP applicants, this article provides specific insight into applications to the London Academic Unit of Application (deanery).

Use of autologous fat grafting in reconstruction following mastectomy and breast conserving surgery: An updated systematic review protocol

Highlights • Use of autologous fat grafting (AFG) in breast reconstructive surgery is increasing.• Concerns around the safety and efficacy of AFG remain.• A protocol for an up-to-date systematic review of AFG for breast reconstruction is presented.• Six categorical outcomes will be assessed including oncological, radiological and patient-reported.• Findings will be communicated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.

Impact of the SCARE guideline on the reporting of surgical case reports: A before and after study

INTRODUCTIONnThe SCARE guideline was developed in 2016 through an expert Delphi consensus exercise. It aimed to improve the quality of reporting of surgical case reports. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of introducing the SCARE guideline for surgical on reporting of case reports submitted to a single journal.nnnMETHODSnA total of 20 case reports published in the International Journal of Surgery Case Reports (IJSCR) and Annals of Medicine and Surgery (AMS) in July and August 2016, prior to the introduction of the SCARE guideline (the pre-SCARE period), were randomly identified and scored against the SCARE criteria. Two independent teams performed the scoring giving a total score out of a theoretical maximum of 34 for each case report, the SCARE score (expressed as a percentage). The scores for the two teams were then compared and consensus was reached to achieve a final sore set. This process was repeated for the January and February 2017 issues of the journal, post implementation of the guideline (the post-SCARE period). SCARE scores were compared between the pre- and post-SCARE periods.nnnRESULTSnThe mean pre-SCARE score was 75.0% (standard deviationxa0±xa06.29, Range 62-84), and the mean post-SCARE score was 82.6% (standard deviationxa0±xa08.02, range 66-99), a 10% relative increase in compliance which was statistically significant (Pxa0<xa00.001). The Cohens Kappa score between teams A and B was 0.871, implying very substantial agreement.nnnCONCLUSIONnImplementation of the SCARE guideline resulted in a 10% improvement in the reporting quality of surgical case reports published in a single journal. Adherence to SCARE reporting guidelines by authors, reviewers and editors should be improved to boost reporting quality. Journals should develop their policies, submission processes and guide for authors to incorporate the guideline.