Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Georges Bordage

Publications and source records attributed to Georges Bordage.

4 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2003

Experimental study design and grant writing in eight steps and 28 questions.

While writing a grant proposal may take a few days, the planning of the study takes much longer and requires thoughtful consideration. The use of a systematic and itemised approach can help in planning crucial details of a study. An eight-step, 28-question, iterative approach is proposed to help with the careful planning of experiments in order to maximise the researchers' chances of acceptance when submitting the study for funding and its results for publication. The steps include defining a relevant research question; selecting instrumentation, study design and statistics; determining sample size and sampling procedure; ensuring data quality throughout data collection and analysis; setting personnel and budget requirements, and writing a convincing grant proposal. Reviewers pay particular attention to the importance of the research topic and question, the presence of a clear problem statement and up to date review of the literature, the use of an optimal design and instrumentation, a sufficient and unbiased sample, and appropriate and well applied statistics. They also appreciate a clear and easy to follow proposal. The research question is the keystone of the entire enterprise, followed by the selection of an optimal study design and the control of possible confounding variables. No study is perfect. The researchers must constantly weigh advantages and disadvantages and select the most scientifically sound and feasible alternatives. While the steps and questions presented are best applied to experimental studies, the principles are also applicable to a wide range of questions and observational, evaluative and qualitative designs.

Guidelines as Topic↗
PubMed2002

Promoting diagnostic problem representation.

PURPOSE: Problem representation, as mediated by semantic qualifiers (SQs), has been associated with better diagnostic outcomes. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of training medical students to use semantic abstractions as a means of building problem representations. METHODS: Sixty second-year medical students were assigned to either an intervention group (n = 20) or a control group (n = 40) during 8 months of an Essentials in Clinical Medicine course which used standardized patient-based workshops. Students were trained to transform findings into SQs and to use abstractions to compare and contrast diagnostic hypotheses. Students were assessed using a standardized patient data collection checklist, a post-encounter patient finding questionnaire (PFQ), and case summaries and write-ups. RESULTS: Experimental subjects used over twice as many SQs in their summaries as control group members (1.40 versus 0.63, P = 0.006). The correlation between checklist and PFQ scores was higher for the experimental group than for the control group (r = 0.70 versus r = 0.58, P </= 0.001). There was no difference between groups in either the number of SQs used in write-ups nor in diagnostic accuracy (P > 0.56). CONCLUSION: A short instructional intervention was successful in promoting the use of SQs and enabled students to recall elicited findings better. This intervention did not enhance data interpretation and diagnostic accuracy. Use of SQs may therefore be a necessary tool for efficient problem representation but one that is insufficient when used in isolation. The naturalistic setting used in this study imposed a number of limitations, implying that further research should test whether instructional efforts should also emphasize recognition of key patient findings and knowledge representation.

Chicago↗
PubMed2002

Patient outcomes for segmental colon resection according to surgeon's training, certification, and experience.

Background. We examined patient outcomes for colon resection to determine if they varied according to surgeon-specific factors including: (1) American Board of Surgery (ABS) certification, (2) colorectal surgery subspecialty certification, (3) site of residency training (university-based vs nonuniversity-based), and (4) years of experience since ABS certification. Methods. We performed a retrospective study of 15,427 admissions of northern Illinois residents who underwent segmental colon resection as their primary operation from 1994 to 1997 at 76 nonfederal Illinois hospitals. There were 514 surgeons. Main outcome measures were inpatient mortality, complications, and hospital length of stay. Regression analyses with mixed effects were used to assess the significance of surgeon-specific variables as a predictor of outcomes after risk adjustment for patient age, gender, emergency admission, surgeon volume, hospital site, colon pathology, and comorbid illnesses. Results. ABS-certification was associated with reduced mortality and morbidity. Increasing years of experience was associated with reduced mortality. Colorectal surgery certification and site of residency training did not significantly affect outcomes. Conclusion. We were able to link patient outcomes with surgeon's training. Certification was an important determinant of patient outcomes for colon resection. Increasing surgeon experience also had a favorable effect on outcomes, suggesting a continued learning curve subsequent to residency. (Surgery 2002;132:663-72).

Adult↗