RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the experience with a new peer review method, "Select Crowd Review" (SCR): anonymized PDFs of manuscripts are accessible to a reviewer crowd via an online platform. It has access for 10 days to enter anonymized comments directly into the manuscript. A SCR-Editor summarizes the annotations, giving a recommendation. Both reviewed PDF and summary are sent back to authors. Upon submission, authors are given a choice to accept or decline SCR. DESIGN: All manuscript submissions since introduction in July 2021 until July 2022 were analyzed regarding acceptance and quality. Manuscripts were sent to a crowd of 45 reviewers and regular double-blinded peer review at the same time. Efficiency and performance of the crowd's reviews were compared with those of regular review. For thoracic manuscripts, a crowd was not yet available. RESULTS: SCR was accepted by the authors for 73/179 manuscripts (40.8%). After desk rejections, 51 cardiac manuscripts entered SCR. For five manuscripts, the crowd did not respond. In all remaining papers, the crowd's recommendation concurred with that of the normal reviewers. Regular peer review took up to 6 weeks. Twelve manuscripts underwent repeated SCR after revision. A median of 2 (0-9) crowd members sent in reviews. In revisions, average response was one reviewer responding. CONCLUSION: SCR encountered good acceptance by authors. As the first experience showed concordant recommendations compared with traditional review, we have extended SCR to thoracic manuscripts for more experience. SCR may become the sole review method for eligible manuscripts. Efficiency should be increased, especially for re-review of revisions.
Assuntos
Editoração , Cirurgiões , Humanos , Revisão da Pesquisa por Pares , Resultado do Tratamento , EficiênciaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Education of medical students in surgery not only consists of knowledge about diseases and their treatment but also of practical skills like i.e. suturing. In the clinical training of medical students, professional interaction and communication with patients is a key component. Due to the circumstances of distancing and reduced exposure to patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, clinical training of medical students has been challenging. To combat these restrictions, digital modern teaching concepts had to be implemented. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Surgical education of medical students was reorganised during the summer semester 2020 and winter semester 2020/2021 and the necessary adjustments, as well as their evaluation by students, were analysed. Results were compared to the pre-COVID evaluations of the summer semester 2019. Furthermore a survey of all university surgical departments in Germany (n = 39) was conducted to compare the different approaches to handling this very new situation. RESULTS: All participating centres were performing surgical education with medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, digital teaching methods were well accepted by students and teachers, even though short-term changes were necessary during the second wave of the pandemic. Both students and teachers missed the direct mutual interaction as well as with patients (summer semester 2020 36%, winter semester 2020/2021 40%). Modern and digital teaching concepts were assessed positively (summer semester 2020 45%, winter semester 2020/2021 40%) and long term implementation was desired by students and teachers (winter semester 2020/2021 60%). CONCLUSION: Training of practical surgical skills, as well as communication skills, can only be taught in presence. Digital learning concepts can support, but not replace, surgical courses held in presence, including contact to patients and manual training. Blended learning concepts facilitate a leap towards modern teaching concepts and increase the quality of classes spent in presence.