Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Nicholas Raison is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Nicholas Raison.


International Journal of Surgery | 2016

The SCARE Statement: Consensus-based surgical case report guidelines

Riaz A. Agha; Alexander J. Fowler; Alexandra Saeta; Ishani Barai; Shivanchan Rajmohan; Dennis P. Orgill; Raafat Yahia Afifi; Raha Al-Ahmadi; Joerg Albrecht; Abdulrahman Alsawadi; Jeffrey Aronson; M. Hammad Ather; Mohammad Bashashati; Somprakas Basu; Patrick J. Bradley; Mushtaq Chalkoo; Ben Challacombe; Trent Cross; Laura Derbyshire; Naheed Farooq; Jerome R. Hoffman; Huseyin Kadioglu; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Boris Kirshtein; Roberto Klappenbach; Daniel M. Laskin; Diana Miguel; James Milburn; Seyed Reza Mousavi; Oliver J. Muensterer

INTRODUCTION Case reports have been a long held tradition within the surgical literature. Reporting guidelines can improve transparency and reporting quality. However, recent consensus-based guidelines for case reports (CARE) are not surgically focused. Our objective was to develop surgical case report guidelines. METHODS The CARE statement was used as the basis for a Delphi consensus. The Delphi questionnaire was administered via Google Forms and conducted using standard Delphi methodology. A multidisciplinary group of surgeons and others with expertise in the reporting of case reports were invited to participate. In round one, participants stated how each item of the CARE statement should be changed and what additional items were needed. Revised and additional items from round one were put forward into a further round, where participants voted on the extent of their agreement with each item, using a nine-point Likert scale, as proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) working group. RESULTS In round one, there was a 64% (38/59) response rate. Following adjustment of the guideline with the incorporation of recommended changes, round two commenced and there was an 83% (49/59) response rate. All but one of the items were approved by the participants, with Likert scores 7-9 awarded by >70% of respondents. The final guideline consists of a 14-item checklist. CONCLUSION We present the SCARE Guideline, consisting of a 14-item checklist that will improve the reporting quality of surgical case reports.


International Journal of Surgery | 2017

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

Riaz A. Agha; Mimi R. Borrelli; Martinique Vella-Baldacchino; Rachel Thavayogan; Dennis P. Orgill; Duilio Pagano; Prathamesh. S. Pai; Somprakas Basu; Jim McCaul; Frederick H. Millham; Baskaran Vasudevan; Cláudio Rodrigues Leles; Richard David Rosin; Roberto Klappenbach; David Machado-Aranda; Benjamin Perakath; Andrew J. Beamish; Mangesh A. Thorat; M. Hammad Ather; Naheed Farooq; Daniel M. Laskin; Kandiah Raveendran; Joerg Albrecht; James Milburn; Diana Miguel; Indraneil Mukherjee; James Ngu; Boris Kirshtein; Nicholas Raison; Michael Jennings Boscoe

INTRODUCTION The 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). METHODS AND ANALYSIS We 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. RESULTS The 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. CONCLUSION We 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.


International Journal of Surgery | 2016

Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines

Riaz A. Agha; Alexander J. Fowler; Shivanchan Rajmohan; Ishani Barai; Dennis P. Orgill; Raafat Yahia Afifi; Raha Al-Ahmadi; Joerg Albrecht; Abdulrahman Alsawadi; Jeffrey Aronson; M. Hammad Ather; Mohammad Bashashati; Somprakas Basu; Patrick J. Bradley; Mushtaq Chalkoo; Ben Challacombe; Trent Cross; Laura Derbyshire; Naheed Farooq; Jerome R. Hoffman; Huseyin Kadioglu; Veeru Kasivisvanathan; Boris Kirshtein; Roberto Klappenbach; Daniel M. Laskin; Diana Miguel; James Milburn; Oliver J. Muensterer; James Ngu; Iain J. Nixon

INTRODUCTION Case series have been a long held tradition within the surgical literature and are still frequently published. Reporting guidelines can improve transparency and reporting quality. No guideline exists for reporting case series, and our recent systematic review highlights the fact that key data are being missed from such reports. Our objective was to develop reporting guidelines for surgical case series. METHODS A Delphi consensus exercise was conducted to determine items to include in the reporting guideline. Items included those identified from a previous systematic review on case series and those included in the SCARE Guidelines for case reports. The Delphi questionnaire was administered via Google Forms and conducted using standard Delphi methodology. Surgeons and others with expertise in the reporting of case series were invited to participate. In round one, participants voted to define case series and also what elements should be included in them. In round two, participants voted on what items to include in the PROCESS guideline using a nine-point Likert scale to assess agreement as proposed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) working group. RESULTS In round one, there was a 49% (29/59) response rate. Following adjustment of the guideline with incorporation of recommended changes, round two commenced and there was an 81% (48/59) response rate. All but one of the items were approved by the participants and Likert scores 7-9 were awarded by >70% of respondents. The final guideline consists of an eight item checklist. CONCLUSION We present the PROCESS Guideline, consisting of an eight item checklist that will improve the reporting quality of surgical case series. We encourage authors, reviewers, editors, journals, publishers and the wider surgical and scholarly community to adopt these.


JAMA | 2017

The Rise of Altmetrics

Hannah Warren; Nicholas Raison; Prokar Dasgupta

With the world’s academic output currently standing at 2.5 million articles per year and doubling every 9 years, sifting the relevant from the irrelevant is vital for researchers, publishers, and funding bodies. Until recently, the influence of a published article would primarily be measured by its citations, a slow process resulting in a long wait before the importance of an article is truly recognized. Views of the article (including PDF and HTML) are another measure of importance, but views can also accumulate slowly. Altmetrics are increasingly recognized tools that aim to measure the real-time reach and influence of an academic article. Altmetric scores quantify the digital attention an article receives in a multitude of online sources. Social media, Wikipedia, public policy documents, blogs, and mainstream news are tracked and screened by the Altmetric database. References to research outputs are traced back to their unique identifier code. The Altmetric algorithm produces a weighted score to reflect the relative reach of each source. For instance, blogs are weighted differently than a mainstream news report. This process allows the attention an individual article receives to be measured from the moment the article is published.


Nature Reviews Urology | 2016

Simulation-based training and assessment in urological surgery

Abdullatif Aydin; Nicholas Raison; Muhammad Shamim Khan; Prokar Dasgupta; Kamran Ahmed

Simulation has become widely accepted as a supplementary method of training. Within urology, the greatest number of procedure-specific models and subsequent validation studies have been carried out in the field of endourology. Many generic-skills simulators have been created for laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery, but only a limited number of procedure-specific models are available. By contrast, open urological simulation has only seen a handful of validated models. Of the available modalities, virtual reality (VR) simulators are most commonly used for endourology and robotic surgery training, the former also employing many high-fidelity bench models. Smaller dry-lab and ex vivo animal models have been used for laparoscopic and robotic training, whereas live animals and human cadavers are widely used for full procedural training. Newer concepts such as augmented-reality (AR) models and patient-specific simulators have also been introduced. Several curricula, including one recommended within, have been produced, incorporating various different training modalities and nontechnical skills training techniques. Such curricula and validated models should be used in a structured fashion to supplement operating room training.


Journal of Endourology | 2016

Validation of the RobotiX Mentor Robotic Surgery Simulator

George Whittaker; Abdullatif Aydin; Nicholas Raison; Francesca Kum; Benjamin Challacombe; Mohammad Shamim Khan; Prokar Dasgupta; Kamran Ahmed

OBJECTIVES To assess face, content, and construct validity of the RobotiX Mentor virtual reality simulator, to assess its acceptability as a robotic surgery training tool and feasibility of its use, and to develop a supplementary training curriculum. SUBJECTS AND METHODS This prospective, observational, and comparative study recruited novice (n = 20), intermediate (n = 15), and expert (n = 11) robotic surgeons as participants from institutions across the United Kingdom and at the 30th European Association of Urology Annual Meeting. Each participant completed nine surgical tasks across two modules on the simulator, followed by a questionnaire to evaluate subjective realism (face validity), task importance (content validity), feasibility, and acceptability. Outcome measures of novice, intermediate, and expert groups were compared using Mann-Whitney U-tests to assess construct validity. RESULTS Construct validity was demonstrated in a total of 17/25 performance evaluation metrics (p < 0.001). Experts performed better than intermediates with regard to time taken to complete the first (p = 0.002) and second (p = 0.043) module, number of instrument collisions (p = 0.040), path length (p =  .049), number of cuts >2 mm deep (p = 0.033), average distance from suture target (p = 0.015), and number of suture breakages (p = 0.038). Participants determined both the simulator console and psychomotor tasks as highly realistic (mean: 3.7/5) and important for surgical training (4.5/5), with system pedals (4.2/5) and knot tying task (4.6/5) scoring highest, respectively. The simulator was also rated as an acceptable (4.3/5) tool for training and its use highly feasible (4.3/5). CONCLUSION Construct, face, and content validity was established for the RobotiX Mentor, and feasibility and acceptability of incorporation into surgical training were ascertained. The RobotiX Mentor shows potential as a valuable tool for training and assessment of trainees in robotic skills. Investigation of concurrent and predictive validity is necessary to complete validation, and evaluation of learning curves would provide insight into its value for training.


Archives of trauma research | 2014

The Reliability of Red Flags in Spinal Cord Compression

Nicholas Raison; Wisam Alwan; Amit Abbot; Mohamed Farook; Arshad Khaleel

Background: Acute low back pain is a common cause for presentation to the emergency department (ED). Since benign etiologies account for 95% of cases, red flags are used to identify sinister causes that require prompt management. Objectives: We assessed the effectiveness of red flag signs used in the ED to identify spinal cord and cauda equine compression. Patients and Methods: It was a retrospective cohort study of 206 patients with acute back pain admitted from the ED. The presence or absence of the red flag symptoms was assessed against evidence of spinal cord or cauda equina compression on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Results: Overall, 32 (15.5%) patients had compression on MRI. Profound lower limb neurologic examination did not demonstrate a statistically significant association with this finding. The likelihood ratio (LR) for bowel and bladder dysfunction (sensitivity of 0.65 and specificity of 0.73) was 2.45. Saddle sensory disturbance (sensitivity of 0.27 and specificity of 0.87) had a LR of 2.11. When both symptoms were taken together (sensitivity of 0.27 and specificity of 0.92), they gave a LR of 3.46. Conclusions: The predictive value of the two statistically significant red flags only marginally raises the clinical suspicion of spinal cord or cauda equina compression. Effective risk stratification of patients presenting to the ED with acute back pain is crucial; however, this study did not support the use of these red flags in their current form.


Journal of Surgical Education | 2017

Training Tools for Nontechnical Skills for Surgeons—A Systematic Review

Thomas Charles Wood; Nicholas Raison; Shreya Haldar; Oliver Brunckhorst; Craig McIlhenny; Prokar Dasgupta; Kamran Ahmed

OBJECTIVE Development of nontechnical skills for surgeons has been recognized as an important factor in surgical care. Training tools for this specific domain are being created and validated to maximize the surgeons nontechnical ability. This systematic review aims to outline, address, and recommend these training tools. DESIGN A full and comprehensive literature search, using a systematic format, was performed on ScienceDirect and PubMed, with data extraction occurring in line with specified inclusion criteria. SETTING Systematic review was performed fully at Kings College London. RESULTS A total of 84 heterogeneous articles were used in this review. Further, 23 training tools including scoring systems, training programs, and mixtures of the two for a range of specialities were identified in the literature. Most can be applied to surgery overall, although some tools target specific specialities (such as neurosurgery). Interrater reliability, construct, content, and face validation statuses were variable according to the specific tool in question. CONCLUSIONS Study results pertaining to nontechnical skill training tools have thus far been universally positive, but further studies are required for those more recently developed and less extensively used tools. Recommendations can be made for individual training tools based on their level of validation and for their target audience. Based on the number of studies performed and their status of validity, NOTSS and Oxford NOTECHS II can be considered the gold standard for individual- and team-based nontechnical skills training, respectively, especially when used in conjunction with a training program.


BJUI | 2017

Competency based training in robotic surgery: benchmark scores for virtual reality robotic simulation

Nicholas Raison; Kamran Ahmed; Nicolo Fossati; Nicola Buffi; Alexandre Mottrie; Prokar Dasgupta; Henk G. van der Poel

To develop benchmark scores of competency for use within a competency based virtual reality (VR) robotic training curriculum.


Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology | 2017

Ischaemic priapism: A clinical review

Joanne Ridgley; Nicholas Raison; M. Iqbal Sheikh; Prokar Dasgupta; M. Shamim Khan; Kamran Ahmed

OBJECTIVE Ischaemic priapism is a rare condition characterised by little or no cavernosal blood flow, pain and rigidity of the penis. Immediate intervention is required to restore blood flow, prevent necrosis and erectile dysfunction. This review was conducted to determine the best course of treatment and identify areas in current guidelines to which improvements could be made. MATERIAL AND METHODS PubMed, Ovid, MEDLINE (1946-December 2016) and the Cochrane Library were searched as sources for literature. Key studies in each of the areas of management were identified and analysed. RESULTS A total of 45 articles were reviewed. The first step in treatment should be aspiration of corporeal blood. Further studies are needed to make firm recommendations as to whether irrigation should follow, as currently literature is inconclusive. If this fails to cause detumescence, sympathomimetics should be injected. The sympathomimetic of choice is phenylephrine as it is effective, specific and causes minimal cardiovascular side effects. It should be injected at a concentration of 100-500 μg/mL, with 1 mL being injected every 3-5 minutes for up to an hour (maximum 1mg in an hour). Surgical shunting is the next step, except in the cases of delayed priapism (48-72 hours duration) where immediate penile prosthesis insertion may be considered more appropriate. Distal shunts should be performed first, followed by proximal ones to minimise damage leading to erectile dysfunction. There exists little evidence recommending one shunting procedure over another. The final intervention is insertion of a penile prosthesis. Literature suggests that an inflatable prosthesis inserted immediately will yield the greatest patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION A review of the literature has highlighted areas in which further research needs to be done to make conclusive recommendations, including whether irrigation should accompany aspiration and efficacy of shunting procedures. Further studies are required to ensure that patients receive the treatment most likely to cause detumescence and maintain erectile function.

Collaboration


Dive into the Nicholas Raison's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ben Challacombe

Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Henk G. van der Poel

Netherlands Cancer Institute

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Benjamin Challacombe

Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Riaz A. Agha

Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge