Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines

PROCESS Group

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

240 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)319-323
Number of pages5
JournalInternational Journal of Surgery
Volume36
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-12-2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Guidelines
Checklist
Exercise

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery

Cite this

@article{f35c90bd8b31436d8745195ba74bcdbd,
title = "Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines",
abstract = "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.",
author = "{PROCESS Group} and Agha, {Riaz A.} and Fowler, {Alexander J.} and Shivanchan Rajmohan and Ishani Barai and Orgill, {Dennis P.} and Raafat Afifi and Raha Alahmadi and Joerg Albrecht and Abdulrahman Alsawadi and Aronson, {Jeffrey K.} and {Hammad Ather}, M. and Mohammad Bashashati and Somprakas Basu and Patrick Bradley and Mushtaq Chalkoo and Ben Challacombe and Laura Derbyshire and Naheed Farooq and Jerome Hoffman and Huseyin Kadioglu and Veeru Kasivisvanathan and Boris Kirshtein and Roberto Klappenbach and Daniel Laskin and Diana Miguel and James Milburn and Oliver Muensterer and James Ngu and Iain Nixon and Ashraf Noureldin and Benjamin Perakath and Nicholas Raison and Kandiah Raveendran and Timothy Sullivan and Achilleas Thoma and Thorat, {Mangesh A.} and Andy Petroianu and Ashwini Rao and Michele Valmasoni and Samuele Massarut and Anil D'cruz and Baskaran Vasudevan and Salvatore Giordano and Donagh Healy and David Machado-Aranda and Millham, {Frederick H.} and Bryan Carroll and Indraneilm Mukherjee and Peter McCulloch and Yasuhiko Sugawara",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.10.025",
language = "English",
volume = "36",
pages = "319--323",
journal = "International Journal of Surgery",
issn = "1743-9191",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines. / PROCESS Group.

In: International Journal of Surgery, Vol. 36, 01.12.2016, p. 319-323.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Preferred reporting of case series in surgery; the PROCESS guidelines

AU - PROCESS Group

AU - Agha, Riaz A.

AU - Fowler, Alexander J.

AU - Rajmohan, Shivanchan

AU - Barai, Ishani

AU - Orgill, Dennis P.

AU - Afifi, Raafat

AU - Alahmadi, Raha

AU - Albrecht, Joerg

AU - Alsawadi, Abdulrahman

AU - Aronson, Jeffrey K.

AU - Hammad Ather, M.

AU - Bashashati, Mohammad

AU - Basu, Somprakas

AU - Bradley, Patrick

AU - Chalkoo, Mushtaq

AU - Challacombe, Ben

AU - Derbyshire, Laura

AU - Farooq, Naheed

AU - Hoffman, Jerome

AU - Kadioglu, Huseyin

AU - Kasivisvanathan, Veeru

AU - Kirshtein, Boris

AU - Klappenbach, Roberto

AU - Laskin, Daniel

AU - Miguel, Diana

AU - Milburn, James

AU - Muensterer, Oliver

AU - Ngu, James

AU - Nixon, Iain

AU - Noureldin, Ashraf

AU - Perakath, Benjamin

AU - Raison, Nicholas

AU - Raveendran, Kandiah

AU - Sullivan, Timothy

AU - Thoma, Achilleas

AU - Thorat, Mangesh A.

AU - Petroianu, Andy

AU - Rao, Ashwini

AU - Valmasoni, Michele

AU - Massarut, Samuele

AU - D'cruz, Anil

AU - Vasudevan, Baskaran

AU - Giordano, Salvatore

AU - Healy, Donagh

AU - Machado-Aranda, David

AU - Millham, Frederick H.

AU - Carroll, Bryan

AU - Mukherjee, Indraneilm

AU - McCulloch, Peter

AU - Sugawara, Yasuhiko

PY - 2016/12/1

Y1 - 2016/12/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84995810323&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84995810323&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.10.025

DO - 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.10.025

M3 - Article

VL - 36

SP - 319

EP - 323

JO - International Journal of Surgery

JF - International Journal of Surgery

SN - 1743-9191

ER -