Dana M Thompson, MD, FACS The Triological Society Chair, Thesis Review Committee
THE TRIOLOGICAL SOCIETY Founded in 1895 in New York Best and brightest in academic and clinical otolaryngology Society membership benefits Provides role models Fellowship with like-minded peers who share common values, interests, and concerns
WHY CONSIDER WRITING A THESIS? Unique contribution to otolaryngology Distinction of being elected to the most prestigious society in otolaryngology Career advancement - early and mid-career Requirement for promotion at many academic centers Career defining and recognition Career-distinguishing - senior candidates
REQUIREMENTS FOR CANDIDACY Board-certified otolaryngologist In practice > 3 years Published > 2 papers after residency Attended 3 national meetings in last 5 years: At least 1 must be Trio Be proposed by 2 active members & approved by Council Write a thesis for review & approval
2015: A YEAR OF CHANGE Through 20142015 Project categories Basic research Clinical research Project categories Basic research Clinical research Health services research Technology/procedure development Otolaryngology status and trends Historical perspectives
TYPES OF PROJECTS BY CATEGORY Clinical Prospective or retrospective clinical data collection Direct clinical application Basic Laboratory studies, in vivo, in vitro Animal studies Genetic studies Health services Patient outcomes, health-related QoL Epidemiology, diversity, population statistics Cost analysis
TYPES OF PROJECTS BY CATEGORY Technology/procedure development Development, standardization, beta testing of new technology Development of new surgical or diagnostic procedure (incl. validation of HRQOL survey) ORL status and trends Resident and medical education Impact of healthcare delivery systems in society Historical perspectives Medical history as it has influenced contemporary ORL knowledge and practice
2015: A YEAR OF CHANGE Review criteria Tailored to project category Three scoring components General (all) Methods, Approach, & Conclusions (varies with project) Overall impact (all) Numerical scoring Guidelines and criteria published on Triological Society website http://www.triological.org/pdf/thesissubmissionguidelines.pdf
GENERAL CRITERIA Objectives/hypothesis (where appropriate) Focused background and review Statement of type of project Clearly written Adherence to format and structure guidelines
OVERALL IMPACT Significance Was question or gap in knowledge answered, clarified, or resolved? Will scientific knowledge and/or clinical practice be improved? Innovation Offer new insights into development of principles & practice of OTL-HNS? Concepts, approaches, methods novel but valid and appropriate? Contribution Contribute to body of knowledge in ways consistent with mission of Triological Society? Can project contribute to principles & practice of ORL-HNS, medicine, and/or society?
Maureen Hannley, PhD The Triological Society Research Consultant and Advisor
ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTION Clinical relevance, not just clinical application Will have sustainable interest Either a positive or negative answer will be interesting Be specific, focused, realistic Time, resources available Subjects Database/access, technical assistance Collaborators if appropriate Expertise!
A WORD ABOUT RETROSPECTIVE CASE SERIES Go beyond simple descriptive study Should have reason for reporting Some unique feature that would be generalizable Some value as hypothesis-generating study Causal comparative study Correlation study Grimes DA, Schulz KF. Descriptive studies: what they can and cannot do. Lancet 359(9301): 145-9, 12 Jan 2002
A WORD ABOUT SURGICAL EXPERIENCE Should not be limited to “how I do it” or “in my hands” reports with clinical outcome Comparison to published or alternative procedure for same indication Solve problems with previous approaches Disadvantages of previous approaches with new approach advantages related to patient characteristics, complications, novel instrumentation Current or historical outcomes
YOUR NEW BEST FRIEND Consult a statistician UP FRONT! Question design statistical treatment Sample size estimations Bias issues Involve sponsor/mentor in planning process Careful, comprehensive literature review
THE CLINICAL RESEARCH QUESTION Begin by asking the question as a general statement “In patients with recurrent acute sinusitis by accepted criteria is ESS the best treatment option to improve symptoms and disease-specific QOL ?” Use PICO to help structure the question, identify elements
REFINE YOUR RESEARCH QUESTION Define the population or material to be studied Define the period of time for the study Select the variables to be measured Change non-specific variables into variables that can be measured.
WRITE THE HYPOTHESIS Write what you expect to find from your study. State your hypothesis in a clear, concise sentence. Should be directional and quantifiable Should be simple, specific, and stated in advance
DOES EVERY STUDY NEED AN HYPOTHESIS? NO Used when tests of statistical significance will be used to compare findings among groups or search for causes, effects, relationships Key words in research question Greater/better than, less than, more likely than Causes, leads to, results in, produces Associated with, related to, similar, correlated
DATA ANALYSIS Descriptive (should always be included) Numbers, demographics: n, age, gender, ethnicity Central tendency: mean, median, mode, quartile Variance: range, standard deviation, percentile Inferential (depends on design, question, characteristics of study group)
WRITING THE THESIS process, a uniform level of scientific rigor can be attained to achieve three objectives: 1) provide support for the most meritorious research in otolaryngology and head
THE BAIT AND THE PUNCHLINE : ONE APPROACH Introduction Opening quotation or fact Context of past research Condition of ignorance Cost of that ignorance Gist of solution Conclusion Gist of solution Larger significance or application What is still not known Call for further research Closing quotation or fact Booth, Colomb, & Williams, 1995
METHODS AND PROCEDURES Sections Subjects, participants, or material Project design Equipment, measures, or approach Relevant procedures Subject/material selection Measurement of dependent variables References to support choice of procedures, especially if options available Statistical analysis as needed
Only results that bear on central question Possible contributing factors to data outcomes A good Results section should tell a story Analyses that support the integrity of the study (internal consistency, variance, etc) Present analyses in logical sequence Use tables & figures to relieve clutter of numbers No results in Discussion; no discussion in Results RESULTS
DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION Put findings in context of other theories and past research Begin with brief overview of problem and your findings Relevance to clinical problems & practice Identify limitations of your research
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.