National Institutes of Health funding among vascular surgeons is rare.

BACKGROUND: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is an essential source of funding for vascular surgeons conducting research. NIH funding is frequently used to benchmark institutional and individual research productivity, help determine eligibility for academic promotion, and as a measure of scientific quality. We sought to appraise the current scope of NIH funding to vascular surgeons by appraising the characteristics of NIH-funded investigators and projects. In addition, we also sought to determine whether funded grants addressed recent Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) research priorities. METHODS: In April 2022, we queried the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results (RePORTER) database for active projects. We only included projects that had a vascular surgeon as a principal investigator. Grant characteristics were extracted from the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results database. Principal investigator demographics and academic background information were identified by searching institution profiles. RESULTS: There were 55 active NIH awards given to 41 vascular surgeons. Only 1% (41/4037) of all vascular surgeons in the United States receive NIH funding. Funded vascular surgeons are an average of 16.3 years out of training; 37% (n = 15) are women. The majority of awards (58%; n = 32) were R01 grants. Among the active NIH-funded projects, 75% (n = 41) are basic or translational research projects, and 25% (n = 14) are clinical or health services research projects. Abdominal aortic aneurysm and peripheral arterial disease are the most commonly funded disease areas and together accounted for 54% (n = 30) of projects. Three SVS research priorities are not addressed by any of the current NIH-funded projects. CONCLUSIONS: NIH funding of vascular surgeons is rare and predominantly consists of basic or translational science projects focused on abdominal aortic aneurysm and peripheral arterial disease research. Women are well-represented among funded vascular surgeons. Although the majority of SVS research priorities receive NIH funding, three SVS research priorities are yet to be addressed by NIH-funded projects. Future efforts should focus on increasing the number of vascular surgeons receiving NIH grants and ensuring all SVS research priorities receive NIH funding.

Trauma and Critical Care Military-Civilian Publications Increased After the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Literature Review.

INTRODUCTION: There continues to be a growing demand for military-civilian partnerships (MCPs) in research collaborations developing medical trauma care in domestic and international affairs. The objective of this comprehensive review is to investigate the difference in the quantity of MCP trauma and critical care publications before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed for the calendar years 2018 and 2021 utilizing MEDLINE, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we performed a three-tiered review of 603 English language articles to identify trauma-related military and/or civilian partners and describe the changes in geographical relationships. RESULTS: A total of 96 (2018) and 119 (2021) articles met screening criteria for trauma and critical care studies and were used for final data extraction. Ultimately, 59 (2018) and 71 (2021) papers met the inclusion criteria of identifying trauma/critical care MCPs and identified both military and civilian partners. There was also an increase from 10 (2018) to 17 (2021) publications that mentioned advocacy for MCP. Using the author affiliations, four regional MCP types were recorded: of 2018 articles, locoregional (3.4%), US-national (47.5%), single international country (42.4%), and between multiple countries (6.8%); of 2021 articles, locoregional (15.5%), US-national (38%), single international country (29.6%), and between multiple countries (16.9%). There has been an increase in the number of locoregional and multinational MCPs and an overall increase in the number of collaborative trauma publications and MCP advocacy papers. A national geographical heat map was developed to illustrate the changes from 2018 to 2021. CONCLUSIONS: There has been an increase in the number of recorded trauma and critical care MCP publications post-pandemic. The growth in the number of manuscripts in more regions post-pandemic suggests an increase in the recognition of collaborations that contribute not only to conflict readiness but also advancements in trauma and surgical care.

Gender Discrepancies in Middle Author Publications in US Academic General Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: To explore gender discrepancies in publications at general surgery departments, we performed a cross-sectional comparing the number of women and men at each academic rank and their number of first author (FA), middle author (MA), last author (LA), and total publications. METHODS: Thirty academic general surgery departments were randomly selected. For each faculty, we tabulated: first, middle, last names, gender, academic rank, educational leadership, year of medical school graduation, and additional graduate degrees. Bibliography, H-index, and citations were downloaded from the Scopus database. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred twenty-six faculty sampled, 881 (66.4%) men and 445 (33.5%) women. Men outnumbered women at all ranks, with increasing disparity at higher ranks. Men outnumbered women in all subspecialties-largest difference in transplant surgery (84.4% versus 15.6%, P < 0.001). Men at all ranks had more MA publications: assistant professor (rate ratio 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.43, P = 0.024), associate professor (1.65; 1.31-2.06, P < 0.001), and professor (1.50; 1.20-1.91, P = 0.008). Men associate professors had more LA publications (1.74; 1.34-2.37, P < 0.001). No differences found in FA publications at any rank, nor LA publications at assistant professor and professor ranks. At subspecialty level, men in surgical oncology (1.95; 1.55-2.45, P < 0.001) and transplant surgery (1.70; 1.09-2.66, P = 0.02) had more MA publications. CONCLUSIONS: While FA and LA publications did not differ significantly across genders, the largest difference lies in MA publications, beginning at junior ranks and persisting with seniority. Discrepancies in MA publications may reflect gender discrepancies in collaborative opportunities, hence total publications should be used cautiously when determining academic productivity.

Modern Impact of Surgery Journals: Associations Between Impact Factor, H5-Index, and Altmetric Score.

INTRODUCTION: While impact factor (IF) remains the "gold standard" metric for journal quality, newer metrics are gaining popularity. These include the H5-index and journal Altmetric Attention Score (AAS). We explored the relationship between the IF, H5-index, and AAS for core general surgery (GS) and subspecialty journals. METHODS: For all GS and subspecialty journals with a Clarivate IF, H5-index (January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021) and journal AAS were obtained. Journal Twitter presence and activity was sourced from Twitter and the Twitter application programming interface. Spearman's correlations were assessed for numeric variables. RESULTS: A total of 105 journals were included, around half (49/105; 46.7%) of which were core GS journals. Median IF was 2.48 and median H5-index 19. Journal IF demonstrated a strong correlation with H5-index overall (r = 0.81), though this ranged from r = 0.95 (P < 0.01) for vascular surgery to r = 0.77 (P < 0.01) for plastic surgery journals. AAS was moderately correlated with the IF and H5-index (r = 0.59 and 0.62, respectively; both P < 0.01). R2 values ranging indicated that 66% of the variation in the H5-index and 35% of the variation in AAS was explained by the IF. Just over half the journals had a Twitter account (54/105; 51.4%). Journals with a Twitter account also had a significantly higher IF, H5-index, and AAS than those without a Twitter account (all P < 0.01). AAS was moderately correlated with Twitter activity (r = 0.59) and Twitter followers (r = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Across GS and subspecialty journals, journal IF correlates strongly with the H5-index and moderately with AAS. However, only 35% of variation in AAS and 66% of variation in the H5-index is explained by the IF, indicating that these metrics measure unique aspects of journal quality. The future growth of surgical journals should be geared towards improving across multiple metrics, including both the conventional and the contemporary, while leveraging social media to improve readership and eventual academic impact.

Lessons in Cultural Adaptations: Translation of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Cervical Cancer Module From English to Chichewa in Malawi.

INTRODUCTION: To complete a culturally appropriate translation of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Cervical Cancer module (QLQ-CX24) from English to Chichewa (one of the official languages of Malawi) in preparation for postsurgical outcomes research in rural Malawian cervical cancer patients. METHODS: Following the EORTC translation procedure manual, two distinct forward translations from English were reconciled into a preliminary Chichewa translation, followed by two distinct back-translations to English. The English back-translation was reconciled and the translation report sent for discussion and proofreading by EORTC; this was followed by pilot testing. All translators were physicians fluent in English and Chichewa. RESULTS: Of 24 questions in QLQ-CX24, three had prior translations available; all three required revision to clarify tense or wording. Three discussion exchanges with EORTC refined the translation and ensured faithfulness to the original English meaning; proofreaders contributed minor changes. Pilot testing was completed on 10 female patients (three with cervical cancer, four suspicious cervical lesions, and three screening only). Three patients were illiterate. During pilot testing, translation of question 46 (Q46) was misunderstood as referring to vaginal discharge instead of feeling "feminine". The remaining questions were understood, with minor feedback for six questions. Final revision of Q46 yielded a phrase describing "feminine" as "appearance or activities as a woman". Concepts comparable to "feminine" were absent in the Chichewa language/regional Malawian culture. The final revision of Q46 was pilot-tested on five patients (three illiterate) and found acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: Translation of the QLQ-CX24 module was completed successfully and revealed absence of the modern concept of femininity in Chichewa language and regional Malawian culture. Care should be taken when creating and translating healthcare-related documents for surgical research to ensure broad applicability across cultures.

Barriers to Surgical Outcomes Research in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review.

INTRODUCTION: Systematic collection and analysis of surgical outcomes data is a cornerstone of surgical quality improvement. Unfortunately, there remains a dearth of surgical outcomes data from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). To improve surgical outcomes in LMICs, it is essential to have the ability to collect, analyze, and report risk-adjusted postoperative morbidity and mortality data. This study aimed to review the barriers and challenges to developing perioperative registries in LMIC settings. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of all published literature on barriers to conducting surgical outcomes research in LMICs using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and GoogleScholar. Keywords included 'surgery', 'outcomes research', 'registries', 'barriers', and synonymous Medical Subject Headings derivatives. Articles found were subsequently reference-mined. All relevant original research and reviews published between 2000 and 2021 were included. The performance of routine information system management framework was used to organize identified barriers into technical, organizational, or behavioral factors. RESULTS: Twelve articles were identified in our search. Ten articles focused specifically on the creation, success, and obstacles faced during the implementation of trauma registries. Technical factors reported by 50% of the articles included limited access to a digital platform for data entry, lack of standardization of forms, and complexity of said forms. 91.7% articles mentioned organizational factors, including the availability of resources, financial constraints, human resources, and lack of consistent electricity. Behavioral factors highlighted by 66.6% of the studies included lack of team commitment, job constraints, and clinical burden, which contributed to poor compliance and dwindling data collection over time. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of published literature on barriers to developing and maintaining perioperative registries in LMICs. There is an immediate need to study and understand barriers and facilitators to the continuous collection of surgical outcomes in LMICs.

Dispersion of National Institute of Health Funding to Departments of Surgery Is Contracting.

INTRODUCTION: NIH funding to departments of surgery reported as benchmark Blue Ridge Institute for Medical Research (BRIMR) rankings are unclear. METHODS: We analyzed inflation-adjusted BRIMR-reported NIH funding to departments of surgery and medicine between 2011 and 2021. RESULTS: NIH funding to departments of surgery and medicine both increased 40% from 2011 to 2021 ($325 million to $454 million; $3.8 billion to $5.3 billion, P < 0.001 for both). The number of BRIMR-ranked departments of surgery decreased 14% during this period while departments of medicine increased 5% (88 to 76 versus 111 to 116; P < 0.001). There was a greater increase in the total number of medicine PIs versus surgery PIs during this period (4377 to 5224 versus 557 to 649; P < 0.001). These trends translated to further concentration of NIH-funded PIs in medicine versus surgery departments (45 PIs/program versus 8.5 PIs/program; P < 0.001). NIH funding and PIs/program in 2021 were respectively 32 and 20 times greater for the top versus lowest 15 BRIMR-ranked surgery departments ($244 million versus $7.5 million [P < 0.01]; 20.5 versus 1.3 [P < 0.001]). Twelve (80%) of the top 15 surgery departments maintained this ranking over the 10-year study period. CONCLUSIONS: Although NIH funding to departments of surgery and medicine is growing at a similar rate, departments of medicine and top-funded surgery departments have greater funding and concentration of PIs/program versus surgery departments overall and lowest-funded surgery departments. Strategies used by top-performing departments to obtain and maintain funding may assist less well-funded departments in obtaining extramural research funding, thus broadening the access of surgeon-scientists to perform NIH-supported research.

The impact of a dedicated social media strategy on enhancing surgical education.

PURPOSE: Social media (SoMe) is increasingly important in surgical education and may be necessary in the current learning environment. Whilst expanding in use and applications, few studies detail the impact of SoMe on measurable outcomes. The goal of this study was to quantify the impact of a dedicated SoMe strategy on engagement metrics for surgical research. METHODS: A retrospective review of a peer-reviewed surgical journal's Twitter microblog platform (@ColorectalDis) was performed from 6/2015 to 4/2021. A formal SoMe strategy was introduced in September 2018. Data were stratified into 2 time periods: pre-intervention (6-2015 to 9-2018) and post-SoMe intervention (9-2018 to 4-2021). The main outcome was the impact of the SoMe strategy on user engagement with the Twitter platform, journal, and traditional journal metrics. Twitter Analytics and Twitonomy were used to analyse engagement. RESULTS: From conception to analysis, the microblog published 1198 original tweets, generating 5 million impressions and 231,000 engagements. Increased account activity (increased tweets published per month-5.51 vs 28.79; p < 0.01) was associated with significant engagement growth, including new monthly followers (213 vs 38; p < 0.01) and interactions with posted articles (4,096,167 vs 269,152; p < 0.01). Article downloads increased twenty-fold post-SoMe intervention (210,449 vs 10,934; p < 0.01), with significant increases in traditional journal metrics of new subscribers (+11%), article submissions (+24%), and impact factor (+0.9) (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: SoMe directly impacts traditional journal metrics in surgical research. By examining the patterns of user engagement between SoMe and journal sites, the growing beneficial impact of a structured social media strategy and SoMe as an educational tool is demonstrated.

Registry-based randomized clinical trials in surgery: Working with ACS-NSQIP and the AHPBA to conduct pragmatic trials.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represent the gold standard for evidence in clinical medicine because of their ability to account for the effects of unmeasured confounders and selection bias by indication. However, their complexity and immense costs limit their application, and thus the availability of high-quality data to guide clinical care. Registry-based RCTs are a type of pragmatic trial that leverages existing registries as a platform for data collection, providing a low-cost alternative for randomized studies. Herein, we describe the tenets of registry RCTs and the development of the first AHPBA/ACS-NSQIP-based registry trial.

Consensus priority research questions in gastrointestinal and endoscopic surgery in the year 2020: results of a SAGES Delphi study.

INTRODUCTION: The objectives of this study were to identify consensus priority research questions according to members of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), and to explore differences in priorities according to specific membership subgroups. METHODS: A modified Delphi study was conducted including active members of SAGES. An initial list of research questions was compiled by members of 26 SAGES Committees and Task Forces, and was further refined by the SAGES Delphi Task Force. The questions were divided into five research categories: (1) Surgical Outcomes; (2) Education, Training, and Simulation; (3) Health Services Research; (4) New Technology; and (5) Artificial Intelligence. Delphi respondents were asked to rank each question with regards to its importance in the field of gastrointestinal and endoscopic surgery (1-low; 5-high). "Priority" was defined as a single-round mean score of ≥ 3.5, and "consensus" as a single-round standard deviation < 1.0. Subgroup analyses were performed according to a priori selected respondent characteristics. RESULTS: The total number of respondents for each round was: Round 1 (n = 407); Round 2 (n = 569); Round 3 (n = 273). In each round, the majority of respondents were male (Round 1: 77.4%; Round 2: 77.1%; Round 3: 76.7%), self-identified as academic (vs. community) surgeons (Round 1: 57.1%; Round 2: 61.1%; Round 3: 60.2%), and practiced in North America (Round 1: 71.8%; Round 2: 70.8%; Round 3: 75.9%). A total of 29 out of 122 research questions met criteria for both "priority" and "consensus"-Surgical Outcomes, n = 6; Education, Training, and Simulation, n = 9; Health Services Research, n = 5; New Technology, n = 5; and Artificial Intelligence, n = 4. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus priority research questions in gastrointestinal and endoscopic surgery were identified across five different research categories. These results can provide direction and areas of interest for funding and investigation for future studies.

Barriers in surgical research: A perspective from the developing world.

Research in surgery has led to significant advances over the last century in terms of how medicine is practised in and outside the operating rooms today. Surgical research in the developed countries is responsible for most of this advancement, but it is often inapplicable in resource-limited settings in the developing world. Lower- and middle-income countries are in a unique position to take this work further, but they are limited by certain barriers. These barriers could broadly be classified under social and cultural, infrastructure, financial, ethical, and personal categories. These barriers are often not fully realised, but can potentially be addressed with concerted efforts to continue the advancement of medicine for everyone.

In a digitally connected world through Likes, Hashtags and Followers - Advancing surgical research through a social media: A narrative review.

In this era of modern information technology, the world is now digitally connected through various platforms on social media, which has changed the way medical professionals work, communicate and learn. The use of social media in surgery is expanding, and it is now becoming an essential tool for surgical training, research and networking. Articles, journal clubs and surgical conferences are within reach of everyone regardless of geographical location worldwide. Electronic publications have now resoundingly replaced printed editions of journals. Collaborative research through social media platforms helps collect diverse data, enhancing the research's global generalisability. The current narrative review was planned to discuss the importance of social media in advancing surgical research and the use of different social media applications in the context of promoting and disseminating surgical research alongside its evolving ethical challenges.

NIH Funding of Researchers in Surgery: Decreased Career Development Awards Over Time.

BACKGROUND: Over time, NIH funding has become increasingly competitive. In addition, academic surgeons' research competes with time required for patient care, operating, and administrative work. Due to these competing interests for surgeons, we hypothesize that the percentage of NIH grants awarded to researchers from departments of surgery is decreasing. METHODS: The NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool was queried for the number and value of new and renewal R01 grants, and career development awards noting which surgery departments received awards from 1998 to -2018. Statistical analysis was performed using univariate and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: The number of career development awards granted to researchers from departments of surgery decreased significantly over time (P = 0.007) while new R01's and R01 renewal awards were stable. The number of grants awarded to researchers from all procedural departments were compared to non-procedural departments and again, career development awards decreased significantly (P = 0.005) over time but new R01's and R01 renewals stayed stable. Looking at the difference in average dollar amount received for new R01, renewal R01, or career development awards between department of surgery awardees and non-surgery over time, there was no significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: NIH funding is becoming increasingly competitive and surgeons have many competing interests. Our study found that there has been a significant decrease in career development awards to department of surgery awardees and procedural specialists. The decrease in receipt of these awards is particularly concerning given that they are meant to provide protected time for developing researchers and thus have potential consequences for future research.

Developing Research Potential and Building Partnerships: A Report of the Fundamentals of Surgical Research Course at the College of Surgeons of East, Central, and Southern Africa.

BACKGROUND: Approximately a decade after the inaugural Fundamentals of Surgical Research Course (FSRC) at the West African College of Surgeons meeting (2008), the Association for Academic Surgery expanded the course offering to the annual meeting of the College of Surgeons of East, Central and Southern Africa (COSECSA). After the second annual offering of the course in 2019, participants were surveyed to assess the impact of the course. METHODS: A survey was distributed to the attendees of the 2019 second COSECSA FSRC course, held in December 2019 in Kampala, Uganda. Approximately 80 people attended at least a portion of the full-day course. Forty-nine participants completed the voluntary survey questionnaire distributed to assess each session of the course at course completion. RESULTS: Ten different countries were represented among the attendees. Of the 49 evaluations, 35 respondents were male and six were female. Eight respondents did not identify a gender. Surgical residents comprised 19 of the 49 attendees, and one of the 49 attendees was a medical student. Thirty-five respondents indicated that their views of surgical research had changed after attending the course. CONCLUSIONS: The second annual FSRC at COSECSA confirmed significant interest in building research skills and partnerships in sub-Saharan Africa. A wide variety of learners attended the course, and a majority of the sessions received overwhelmingly positive feedback. Multiple conference attendees expressed interest in serving as faculty for the course moving forward, highlighting a viable path for sustainability as the Association for Academic Surgery develops an international research education platform.

Social media in surgery: evolving role in research communication and beyond.

PURPOSE: To present social media (SoMe) platforms for surgeons, how these are used, with what impact, and their roles for research communication. METHODS: A narrative review based on a literature search regarding social media use, of studies and findings pertaining to surgical disciplines, and the authors' own experience. RESULTS: Several social networking platforms for surgeons are presented to the reader. The more frequently used, i.e., Twitter, is presented with details of opportunities, specific fora for communication, presenting tips for effective use, and also some caveats to use. Details of how the surgical community evolved through the use of the hashtag #SoMe4Surgery are presented. The impact on gender diversity in surgery through important hashtags (from #ILookLikeASurgeon to #MedBikini) is discussed. Practical tips on generating tweets and use of visual abstracts are presented, with influence on post-production distribution of journal articles through "tweetorials" and "tweetchats." Findings from seminal studies on SoMe and the impact on traditional metrics (regular citations) and alternative metrics (Altmetrics, including tweets, retweets, news outlet mentions) are presented. Some concerns on misuse and SoMe caveats are discussed. CONCLUSION: Over the last two decades, social media has had a huge impact on science dissemination, journal article discussions, and presentation of conference news. Immediate and real-time presentation of studies, articles, or presentations has flattened hierarchy for participation, debate, and engagement. Surgeons should learn how to use novel communication technology to advance the field and further professional and public interaction.

Rapid Adaptation of a Surgical Research Unit to Conduct Clinical Trials During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought most ongoing clinical trials to a standstill, while at the same time emphasizing the need for new therapeutic treatments and strategies to mitigate the morbidity and mortality related to COVID-19. Recent publication of several observational studies has generated much discussion surrounding efficacy of drugs including hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and remdesivir, stressing the need for high-quality prospective, randomized control trials in patients with COVID-19. Ongoing "stay at home" orders and institutional policies mandating "work from home" for nonessential employees, which includes most research personnel, have impacted the ability to implement and conduct clinical studies. This article discusses the approach of an experienced clinical trials unit to make adjustments for ongoing studies and ensure the safety of study participants. At the same time, plans were implemented to continue collection of data to achieve endpoints, safely enroll and follow participants in studies offering potential benefit, and quickly implement new COVID-19 clinical trials. The existence of a Division of Clinical Research with regulatory, budgeting, contracting, and coordinating expertise within a department of surgery can successfully accommodate a crisis situation and rapidly adapt to new requirements for the safe, efficient, and effective conversion to a remote work force without compromising the research process.

Navigating the Postgraduate Research Fellowship: A Roadmap for Surgical Residents.

BACKGROUND: To preserve the future of surgical innovation, opportunities for surgical residents to receive structured research training are paramount. The objective of this article is to help surgical residents navigate a research fellowship by overviewing key topics such as choosing an area of focus and supervisor, applying for external funding, transitioning away from clinical duties, managing intellectual property, integrating family planning, and incorporating research experience into independent career development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the framework of the University of Toronto's graduate degree-awarding Surgeon-Scientist Training Program, the authors outline key considerations, decisions, and pearls for surgical residents considering or currently enrolled in a full-time research fellowship training program. RESULTS: Full-time research fellowships offer a unique opportunity for residents interested in an academic career. Such full-time research fellowships away from clinical duties allow surgical trainees to focus on developing key research competencies, including how to generate hypotheses, apply research methodology, gain experience presenting and publishing manuscripts, and ultimately apply these skills as independent investigators to improve patient and population health. Research fellowships may also be an opportunity to develop intellectual property or facilitate family planning. Practical tips are provided for the transition back into clinical training and how to effectively market one's research skills for career advancement. CONCLUSIONS: The authors outline key considerations, decisions, and pearls for surgical residents considering or currently enrolled in a full-time research fellowship training program. By adhering to the principles highlighted in this article, residents will be able to successfully navigate a full-time research fellowship to optimize their intellectual development, maximize their academic productivity, and facilitate their transition into an independent investigator.

Registry-Based Randomized Controlled Trials: A New Paradigm for Surgical Research.

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard to establish evidence for surgical practice but can be hindered by high costs, complexity, and time requirements. Recently, observational registries have been leveraged as platforms for clinical trials to address these limitations, though few registry-based surgical RCTs have been conducted. Here, we present our group's approach to surgical registry-based RCTs and early results. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To facilitate these trials, we focused on registry integration into surgeons' workflows, routine collection of patient-reported outcomes at clinic visits, and pragmatic trial design featuring broad inclusion criteria and standard of care follow-up. These features maximize generalizability and facilitate follow-up by minimizing visits and tests outside of normal practice. RESULTS: Since 2017, our group has completed enrollment in 4 registry-based RCTs with another 5 trials ongoing. Of these, 4 trials have been multicenter. Over 1000 patients have been enrolled in these studies, with follow-up rates of 90% or greater. Most of these trials are on track to complete enrollment in approximately 2 y from their start date. Beyond salary support, resource utilization is low. None of our trials has been terminated due to lack of resources or futility. CONCLUSIONS: Registry-based RCTs allow for efficient conduct of pragmatic surgical trials. Thoughtful study design, registry integration into surgeons' routines, and a team culture embracing research are paramount. We believe registry-based trials are the future of affordable, high-level, prospective surgical research.

Design and Implementation of an Infrastructure Program to Support Clinical Research in Surgery.

Barriers to active participation in clinical research among academic surgeons include insufficient research training and mentorship, increased clinical demands, lack of protected research time, limited access to resources, complex regulatory requirements, and a highly competitive research funding environment. We describe the development and implementation of a novel clinical research infrastructure program designed to attenuate these barriers and increase clinical research engagement and productivity in a large academic surgery department. Interim outcomes show a high utilization of program services across all divisions within the department, a substantial increase in new clinical research protocols, more applications submitted to funding agencies, and a high level of user satisfaction. We discuss how a departmental infrastructure program can simultaneously address barriers faced by surgeon clinical researchers and foster continuation of the longstanding tradition of innovation and discovery in academic surgery.

Starting Line for Scholarly Activity in New Residency Programs: Lessons Learned for Institutional Success.

BACKGROUND: One focal point of Graduate Medical Education (GME) is scholarly activity and its integration into clinical practice by evidence-based learning. Program directors and educational leaders view scholarly work as the foundation for continuing resident education; however, the high demand of scholarly activity can be cumbersome for newly accredited residency programs. METHODS: We reviewed all scholarly activity over a 2-y period (2015-2017) involving three new GME programs at a single institution (internal medicine, surgery, and transitional year). A voluntary anonymous online survey was distributed to all residents to assess their perceptions and expectations regarding research, review prior research experience, and analyze any barriers or successes within the research program. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 61 residents with a response rate of 59% (36/61), including postgraduate years 1-5. Respondent demographics included males (55.6%), ages 26-30 y (63.9%), and respondents commonly being postgraduate year-1 (58.3%) level. In total, 171 scholarly activities were recorded. Survey review of resident basic research knowledge, concepts, and experience included preresidency research (91.7%), prior scholarly activity (79.2%), and interest to meet career goals (66.7%). Barriers or delays in research were lack of structured curriculum (50%), technical support (45.8%), research experience (37.5%), and interest (33%). CONCLUSIONS: Newly accredited GME training programs can avoid an unnecessary institutional deficiency in scholarly activity by developing a structured and comprehensive research curriculum. Resident engagement, developing a mentor-mentee relationship, and research experience before residency can allow a successful research program.