The Level of Evidence Presented at Plastic Surgery Meetings: What Do We Have to Learn?

AAPS Podium Presentations-Has the Level of Evidence Changed over the Past Decade?

An increase in the number and quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and trends toward higher levels of evidence (LOE) in the plastic surgery literature has been reported; however, there has not been a specific focus on the LOE of presentations at scientific meetings. The purpose of this study was to ascertain trends in the LOE of studies presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Plastic Surgeons.

METHODS

A hand search was conducted identifying all abstracts of podium presentations from 2009 to 2019. LOE, using American Society of Plastic Surgeons guidelines, were ascribed to each presentation, along with identification of any corresponding journal publications. RCTs were further analyzed using the 12-item Modified Consolidated Standard of Reporting Trials checklist.

RESULTS

Four hundred forty-one studies with a median LOE of 3 were included in the study. A non-significant improvement in the mean level of evidence was noted over time (P = 0.09) along with an increase in the number of level 2 studies (P = 0.589) and RCTs (P = 0.717). Level 1 studies were rare (0.91%) and of fair quality (median checklist score 8 out of 12). Seventy-two percent of abstracts resulted in publication, and the mean lag time to publication was 422 days.

CONCLUSIONS

A favorable trend is observed with respect to the mean LOE as well as the number of level 2 studies and RCTs over time. The importance of research meeting attendance to maintain up-to-date information is noteworthy, given the long lag time from presentation to publication.

Assessing the Quality of Evidence Presented at Annual General Meetings: A 5-Year Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Health care professionals rely on annual general meetings (AGMs) to obtain up-to-date information and practice guidelines relevant to their specialty. The majority of such information at meetings is presented through abstract sessions. However, the quality of the evidence presented during such abstract sessions is unclear. Standardized measures were applied to assess the quality of evidence of abstracts presented at the Canadian Society of Nephrology AGM over a 5-year period.

METHODS

Two authors independently reviewed all CSN AGM abstracts presented from 2012 to 2016. Using a schema published in 2011 by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM), each abstract was subsequently ranked based on the quality of evidence. Schema categories ranged from level I, representing the highest evidence quality, to level V, representing the lowest. The number of authors and the authors' institution affiliations were also collected from the abstracts, where available, or if affiliations were unclear, an internet search of the author was performed.

RESULTS

Six hundred forty-two articles were screened. In total, 70% (n = 450) met the inclusion criteria. When assessed, 15% of articles were level I (highest quality), 17% level II, 53% level III, 12% level IV, and 3% level V (lowest quality). A Jonckheere-Terpstra test demonstrated a significant trend of increasing quality of evidence (P < .05) and collaboration (P < .005) over the 5-year study period. There was a significant correlation between level of evidence and collaboration across years reviewed in the study, rs(98) = -0.226, P < .001.

DISCUSSION

The results indicate a consistent increase in quality of evidence and collaborative submissions over time. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first assessment and analysis of AGM presentation quality within internal medicine and its subspecialties. Documenting and monitoring changes in the quality of evidence with a standardized framework may offer valuable insight pertaining to the medical field and the research community.

Plastic Surgery Residents' Understanding and Attitudes Toward Biostatistics: A National Survey

BACKGROUND

An understanding of biostatistics is a critical skill for the practicing plastic surgeon. The purpose of the present study was to assess plastic surgery residents' attitudes and understanding of biostatistics.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study of plastic surgery residents. A survey assessing resident attitudes regarding biostatistics, confidence with biostatistical concepts, and objective knowledge of biostatistics was distributed electronically to trainees in plastic surgery programs in the United States. Bivariate and regression analyses were used to identify significant associations and adjust for confounders/effect modifiers.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-three residents responded to the survey (12.3% response rate). Respondents expressed positive attitudes regarding biostatistics in plastic surgery practice, but only moderate levels of confidence with various biostatistical concepts. Both attitudes and confidence were positively associated with the number of plastic surgery journals read monthly and formal coursework in biostatistics (P < 0.01). Resident attitudes were positively correlated with confidence (r = 0.33, P < 0.01). The mean percentage of correct responses on knowledge-assessments was 43.6% (20.8%). Integrated residents performed better than independent track residents (P = 0.04). Residents had difficulty with study design, the correct use of analysis of variance, regression analysis, and identifying a statistically significant result. Resident confidence was moderately correlated with performance (r = 0.31, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Plastic surgery residents place a high degree of importance on knowledge of biostatistics in the practice of plastic surgery but have only a fair understanding of core statistical concepts.

The level of evidence keeps improving: An updated analysis of the scientific program at the Canadian Association of Paediatric Surgeons Annual Meeting

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to examine the scientific program of the Canadian Association of Pediatric Surgeons (CAPS) to determine if the quality of research has improved.

METHODS

CAPS abstracts from 2010 to 2013 were reviewed by two independent researchers. Presentation type, study design, and level of evidence (LOE) were recorded. All differences were adjudicated by an epidemiologist. Fisher's exact test compared results to a previous study that assessed LOE in CAPS abstracts from 2005 to 2009.

RESULTS

291 abstracts were reviewed with 53 excluded and 238 included in final analysis. Reviewers demonstrated high agreement for study design (ICC=0.767 95%CI 0.715-0.810) and LOE (ICC=0.914 95%CI 0.892-0.931). Out of 238 studies, 117 (49%) were podium and 122 (51%) posters. Number of high-quality studies increased in 2010-2013 versus 2005-2009 (n=253), specifically systematic reviews (n=15 (6%) vs. n=3 (1%) p<0.01), randomized controlled trials (n=4 (2%) vs. n=0 (0%), p=0.05), and prospective cohort studies (n=41 (17%) vs. n=26 (10%), p<0.001). Retrospective cohort is still the most common. However, the number of studies has significantly decreased (n=121 (51%) vs. n=171 (68%), p<0.001). The proportion of high-level studies (LOE 2 or better) also improved (48 (20%) vs. 24 (10%) p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The quality of research presented at CAPS has greatly improved, especially in the past five years.