ArticlePloS one2024
A consensus definition of creativity in surgery: A Delphi study protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionClear definitions are essential in science, particularly in the study of abstract phenomena like creativity. Due to its inherent complexity and domain-specific nature, the study of creativity has been complicated, as evidenced by the various definitions used to describe it and the multitude of tools which claim to measure it. Surgery is a safety-critical profession where creativity could be useful in navigating unforeseen problems and circumstances, as well as developing new innovations to improve patient outcomes. To validly and reliably study creativity in surgery, a surgery-specific definition is required. We aim to develop a consensus definition of creativity in surgery, utilizing the existing creativity literature and surgeon input. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The objective of this study is to generate a consensus definition of creativity in surgery. We will first conduct a focus group comprised of 4-12 highly experienced surgeons to generate knowledge on surgeons' perceptions, attitudes and beliefs about creativity in surgery, collect real-world examples of creativity in surgery, and obtain opinions on the existing definitions of creativity in the literature. The selection of focus group participants will be performed using purposive sampling of the chairs and/or chiefs of each surgical sub-specialty at our home institution. Several questions relating to creativity in surgery will be posed to the focus group, to be rated using a 7-point Likert scale and used as prompts for group discussion. We will also search MEDLINE, PsycINFO and EMBASE to find definitions of creativity in the scientific literature. Six definitions, chosen based on citation frequency and relevancy to surgery, will be presented to the focus group for ranking and discussion. Lastly, in addition to novelty and effectiveness, which are widely accepted as necessary components of creativity, the focus group will be asked to consider the necessity of other components for creativity in surgery, sourced from the scientific literature. Descriptive and thematic analyses are planned for the quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. The results of the focus group will be incorporated in the drafting of five definitions of creativity in surgery, which will be presented as initial Delphi statements in the Delphi study. For the Delphi panel, we will perform non-probability purposive sampling of surgeons and surgeon trainees at our home institution, with a minimum panel size of 12. Panellists will be asked to select the definition of creativity most relevant to surgery, with each Delphi round electronically delivered. After each round, the steering committee will meet to review the results and adjust the statements for the next round based on the feedback. A maximum of 5 rounds will be performed, or until consensus is reached (≥75% agreement). Recruitment is scheduled to begin on 1 August 2024. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All focus group and panellists will be given written and verbal information on the study and provide signed, informed consent. We plan to publish the results of our study in a creativity science- or surgery-focused journal to disseminate the results of our study to relevant stakeholders. We also plan to present the results of our research at local, national, and international conferences.
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.