Jeffrey J Perry1,2, Christian Vaillancourt3,4, Corinne M Hohl5, Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy3,4, Judy Morris6, Marcel Emond7,8, Jacques Lee9,10, Ian G Stiell3,4. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. jperry@ohri.ca. 2. Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada. jperry@ohri.ca. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 4. Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada. 5. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 6. Department of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada. 7. CHU de Québec, Hôpital de l'Enfant-Jésus, Québec City, Québec, Canada. 8. Division of Emergency Medicine, Université Laval, Québec City, Québec, Canada. 9. Schwartz\Reisman Emergency Medicine Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. 10. Department of Emergency Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) 2020 Academic Symposium Panel was to present recommendations for collaboration on (1) writing a grant application; (2) conducting a study; (3) writing an abstract; and (4) writing a manuscript. METHODS: We assembled an expert panel of eight experienced emergency medicine clinician scientists from across Canada. Panel members performed literature searches for each of the four topics. Draft recommendations were developed and refined in an iterative fashion by panel members. We solicited external feedback on the draft recommendations online from identified researchers known to CAEP and in person at the Network of Canadian Emergency Researchers meeting in February 2020. We obtained additional feedback during an online symposium presentation on October 15th, 2020, open to all members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. RESULTS: Four sets of recommendations were established for each component including: 14 for writing a grant application including relevant timelines; 23 for conducting a study; 13 for writing an abstract; and 18 for writing a manuscript. Forming a strong team, including patients, appropriate methodologists, content experts and a mix of senior and junior investigators, establishing and following clear timelines, and proactive communications were common themes. CONCLUSIONS: We offer recommendations for research collaboration for (1) writing a grant, (2) conducting a study, (3) writing an abstract, and (4) writing a manuscript. We believe these recommendations will help to improve the science, improve grant success, and improve the impact of the abstracts and manuscripts.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) 2020 Academic Symposium Panel was to present recommendations for collaboration on (1) writing a grant application; (2) conducting a study; (3) writing an abstract; and (4) writing a manuscript. METHODS: We assembled an expert panel of eight experienced emergency medicine clinician scientists from across Canada. Panel members performed literature searches for each of the four topics. Draft recommendations were developed and refined in an iterative fashion by panel members. We solicited external feedback on the draft recommendations online from identified researchers known to CAEP and in person at the Network of Canadian Emergency Researchers meeting in February 2020. We obtained additional feedback during an online symposium presentation on October 15th, 2020, open to all members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians. RESULTS: Four sets of recommendations were established for each component including: 14 for writing a grant application including relevant timelines; 23 for conducting a study; 13 for writing an abstract; and 18 for writing a manuscript. Forming a strong team, including patients, appropriate methodologists, content experts and a mix of senior and junior investigators, establishing and following clear timelines, and proactive communications were common themes. CONCLUSIONS: We offer recommendations for research collaboration for (1) writing a grant, (2) conducting a study, (3) writing an abstract, and (4) writing a manuscript. We believe these recommendations will help to improve the science, improve grant success, and improve the impact of the abstracts and manuscripts.
Entities:
Keywords:
Collaboration; Emergency medicine; Research