Background Structured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide the opportunity to harness the... Show moreBackground Structured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide the opportunity to harness the knowledge of experts to support clinical decision making in areas of uncertainty. They are widely used in biomedical research, in particular where disease characteristics or resource limitations mean that high-quality evidence generation is difficult. However, poor reporting of methods used to reach a consensus - for example, not clearly explaining the definition of consensus, or not stating how consensus group panellists were selected - can potentially undermine confidence in this type of research and hinder reproducibility. Our objective is therefore to systematically develop a reporting guideline to help the biomedical research and clinical practice community describe the methods or techniques used to reach consensus in a complete, transparent, and consistent manner. Methods The ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document) project will take place in five stages and follow the EQUATOR Network guidance for the development of reporting guidelines. In Stage 1, a multidisciplinary Steering Committee has been established to lead and coordinate the guideline development process. In Stage 2, a systematic literature review will identify evidence on the quality of the reporting of consensus methodology, to obtain potential items for a reporting checklist. In Stage 3, Delphi methodology will be used to reach consensus regarding the checklist items, first among the Steering Committee, and then among a broader Delphi panel comprising participants with a range of expertise, including patient representatives. In Stage 4, the reporting guideline will be finalised in a consensus meeting, along with the production of an Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. In Stage 5, we plan to publish the reporting guideline and E&E document in open-access journals, supported by presentations at appropriate events. Dissemination of the reporting guideline, including a website linked to social media channels, is crucial for the document to be implemented in practice. Discussion The ACCORD reporting guideline will provide a set of minimum items that should be reported about methods used to achieve consensus, including approaches ranging from simple unstructured opinion gatherings to highly structured processes. Show less
BackgroundStructured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide the opportunity to harness the... Show moreBackgroundStructured, systematic methods to formulate consensus recommendations, such as the Delphi process or nominal group technique, among others, provide the opportunity to harness the knowledge of experts to support clinical decision making in areas of uncertainty. They are widely used in biomedical research, in particular where disease characteristics or resource limitations mean that high-quality evidence generation is difficult. However, poor reporting of methods used to reach a consensus – for example, not clearly explaining the definition of consensus, or not stating how consensus group panellists were selected – can potentially undermine confidence in this type of research and hinder reproducibility. Our objective is therefore to systematically develop a reporting guideline to help the biomedical research and clinical practice community describe the methods or techniques used to reach consensus in a complete, transparent, and consistent manner.MethodsThe ACCORD (ACcurate COnsensus Reporting Document) project will take place in five stages and follow the EQUATOR Network guidance for the development of reporting guidelines. In Stage 1, a multidisciplinary Steering Committee has been established to lead and coordinate the guideline development process. In Stage 2, a systematic literature review will identify evidence on the quality of the reporting of consensus methodology, to obtain potential items for a reporting checklist. In Stage 3, Delphi methodology will be used to reach consensus regarding the checklist items, first among the Steering Committee, and then among a broader Delphi panel comprising participants with a range of expertise, including patient representatives. In Stage 4, the reporting guideline will be finalised in a consensus meeting, along with the production of an Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document. In Stage 5, we plan to publish the reporting guideline and E&E document in open-access journals, supported by presentations at appropriate events. Dissemination of the reporting guideline, including a website linked to social media channels, is crucial for the document to be implemented in practice.DiscussionThe ACCORD reporting guideline will provide a set of minimum items that should be reported about methods used to achieve consensus, including approaches ranging from simple unstructured opinion gatherings to highly structured processes. Show less
Chiesa-Estomba, C.M.; Ravanelli, M.; Farina, D.; Remacle, M.; Simo, R.; Peretti, G.; ... ; Piazza, C. 2020
Introduction The modern availability in daily practice of different DICOM viewers allows physicians to routinely evaluate computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) scans of patients in... Show moreIntroduction The modern availability in daily practice of different DICOM viewers allows physicians to routinely evaluate computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) scans of patients in the pre-, intra-, and postoperative settings. Their systematic use, together with a close surgeon-radiologist cooperation, may greatly improve outcomes of patients to be treated by transoral microsurgery for laryngeal cancer. Materials and methods We herein propose guidelines for systematic evaluation of CT/MR images taken from patients affected by supraglottic and glottic cancer to be treated by transoral microsurgery. Results A methodical, step-by-step approach focused on laryngeal anatomy, systematically looking at each true and false vocal folds, anterior commissure, laryngeal ventricle, subglottic area, epiglottis, thyroid, cricoid, and arytenoid cartilages, posterior commissure, crico-arytenoid unit, paraglottic and pre-epiglottic spaces, and possible extra-laryngeal extension is proposed. This checklist may be useful before imaging performance (to focus on specific issues to be detailed by the radiologist), as well before and during surgery for the specific evaluation of details to be cleared during transoral microsurgery. Conclusion Detailed preoperative evaluation of supraglottic and glottic anatomy is essential prior to any transoral approach for neoplastic disease. The proposed imaging checklist described herein represents a step-by-step guide to surgeons performing this kind of interventions and an aid in achieving a meticulous approach from a surgical perspective. Show less
