ArticleThe American surgeon2022
Spotlighting Research During COVID-19: Introduction of an International Online Multi-Round Research Competition for Trainees.
Article in The American surgeon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
problemThe coronavirus pandemic led to the cancellation of many academic events. While some transitioned to virtual formats, others disappeared, offering fewer opportunities for trainees to share research. Facing this challenge, the APPROACH: Submission to the research competition was open to trainees at any level. The competition comprised four rounds: (1) visual abstracts (all welcomed), (2) three-minute "Quickshot" presentation (32 advance), (3) eight-minute oral presentations (16 advance), and (4) final question-and-answer style defense (final 4 compete). Progression through the first three rounds was determined by public voting. Winners were determined by live voting during the final session. OUTCOMES: A total of 73 visual abstracts were accepted for presentation. Fifty-six percent (n = 41) of first authors were medical students, 36% residents (n = 26), and 7% fellows (n = 6). Five were from international first authors (7%). Abstracts represented research topics including basic science (n = 6, 8%)), clinical outcomes (n = 38, 52%), and education (n = 29, 40%). Social media impressions exceeded a total of 30,000 views. NEXT STEPS: This virtual, multi-round research competition served as a blueprint for a novel approach to research dissemination. The format enabled expanded US national and international engagement with trainees in all stages of their career. Future research symposia should consider the impact of popularity bias, timing, and voting strategies during the event planning period to optimize success.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.