Computer generated transcript

Warning!
The following transcript was generated automatically from the content and has not been checked or corrected manually.

Okay, so it's gone red now, So that means the talk is being recorded from this point. Um, the participants can now see us. Um, I'm just gonna wait a few minutes just to get everyone in, and then I'll introduce you, and then you can go ahead and begin your talk. Perfect. People are just filing it now. I'll just put a reminder on the chart for everyone. I'll just wait for a few more people, and then we'll make us start. I just write a few things in the chart. Do I just press the present now? After when to start? Okay. Yeah. And you can present straight from the fifth slide once it's loaded the fifth slide onwards because it's unlikely to catch up with you. Okay. Yeah. Okay. I think we'll make a start. Hello, everyone. Welcome to I C. A five. Science and context. Um, it's lovely to see you all here. Thank you so much for joining. So I've got Pedro with us. So Pedro's lovely, and it was already giving me some tips for science and context. So, um, I hope you will find his talk very, very useful. Um, the slides are already uploaded in case you need to use them. And please, please use the chat function to ask any questions. Um, and Pedro will answer them. Um, So go ahead, honey. Um, let me just present hi, everyone. Just like that. How everyone's doing nicely. Oh, really? Do I need to present? Do I need to upload the slides myself? Um, I've uploaded them for you, but what it does is it, like, uploads them onto the screen format. So, like, what happens is, it loads them, and then you've got all, like, the slides loading as you're talking. Where can I find that? Sorry. So if you look at the bottom like five icons, the middle one shows like, uh, like, share, screen like present. Now button. If you click that, it should allow you to share your slides. A walmart. So I need to upload them. Don't. Yes. Yeah, but they're uploaded onto the event itself. Okay. Perfect. I'll just upload the pdf one method. Sorry, everyone, for the delay. Um, perfect. It's processing. Yeah. Once it's processed to the fifth slide, you can just begin from there. Perfect. Hi, everyone. My name is Pedro. I am currently in fifth year and last year I did the remote medicine BSC. So I've, uh I have a good understanding of what you guys are going through right now, so I hope January isn't hasn't been too bad. Uh, so I'll be giving a talk on the science and context. I see a five. So, like you said, if any point you have any questions, feel free to answer them to put them in the chat, and I'll try to answer them either during the talk or at the end of the talk. So before I start just a disclaimer that there are many different ways to write your S I C s, um and firstly, you should always follow the expectations of your course leads. So if at any point you have any questions, make sure you go to your course leads. Um, but here's my sort of whistlestop tour of how to write your s. I see. So the so the session structure will be the following. We'll go through what the S I C task is how to write your introduction. Uh, how to write your case Liberate than the evidence based discussion section. And lastly, the abstract. So what is it? What is Oh, perfect. So this is a clinical case reports which involves you presenting clinical picture, uh, which is then followed by a discussion about the existing literature. And this discussion is, is usually you talking about something related to the patient. So whether that's a treatment or an investigation that received or something to do with the diagnosis with the pathophysiology of the patient's condition, there's two sections to the S. I see the first one is the case summary, which involves an introduction as well. And this should form around a third of your report, followed by the evidently discussion, which would be around two thirds of the report. The waiting is 40% of module to or around 10% or 10% of your overall BSC, and the deadline is in just under a week's time. So at 10 AM next Friday to the 27th, the word limits are as follows. For the the overall case report, that's a maximum, uh, 1005 100 words. And here is sort of my recommendation of how you should split each section up. The introduction should be around 100 words. The case summary around 400 then the evidence based discussion around 1000 words. UH, you'll you'll also have to write an abstract of 250 words maximum. There are no limits to the number of figures and tables that you can have. However, make sure that if you do include any figures, tables that the relevant to your case reports so don't include them don't include anything that's unnecessary. Otherwise we'll make it seem to clunky, and you have a maximum number of references of 15. Um, and the reason why it's only 15 is because you actually don't have that many words to write. And, uh, if if you present any more papers that they'll be too much for you to talk about and they want in this tax they want to, they want you to focus on the depth of the discussion as opposed to breath. Uh, so moving on to the introduction, uh, so they want you to write, they'll expect you to right around around one or two small paragraphs, briefly introducing the the main themes and topics are pertinent to your case report. Uh, this is an opportunity for you to set the scene for your reader. So I have to think about what is this case report covering? Why is it relevant? What makes it interesting? Is there sort of any Any prevalent issue that you want to be discussing here And lastly, um, have a small a few sentences on, uh, the existing literature out there. What is it on? Is there anything missing? Are there any existing guidelines that would be relevant for your main theme or topic? Um and then and I I would actually write the introduction towards the end. So once you've sort of written the bulk of your case summary and the bulk of your evidence based discussion, that's why you start writing your introduction. That's easiest. That's the easiest way to no what you want to present to your reader first, uh, moving on to the case summary. This is where you'll summarize the clinical journey of the patient and with only the relevant information. Um, this is not a full case reports. So you don't need to talk about everything that your patient has every single core morbidity, every sort of all the family history, all the social history that that your patient has make sure the information that you put in here is relevant, uh, and focus to your to your sort of main theme topic and your evidence based discussion. Um, that's a small list. There is a lot of all the different formations that you could include in your case summary. I'll go through that in a little bit more detail in the upcoming slides, and lastly, make sure that you describe everything in a chronological order. So this is for this is, Firstly, this is the easiest way to write, and the easiest way for your rights for the reader to follow the clinical journey. So, uh, of your patient, so you want to think about what happened? What did they present with and where what, what investigations that they undergo, what treatment did they receive and what was the prognosis? And again, make sure you only use information that you need because this is, uh, some of the BS CS. You'll be using real patient's so you still want to maintain patient confidentiality. So the way I sort of thought of my clinic of my clinical case summary was what happened before. What did the patient present with, uh So, for example, one of ours was a loss of consciousness after climbing a mountain and what is relevant in their history. So the important aspects of the past medical history, family history and social history Uh, the important risk factors I exist here as well. Then I thought about what happened in hospital. So examination, findings and investigations. Um so think bedside blood's imaging. What happened on the bedside? Any specific examination? Findings? Uh, any basic observations? Done what bloods were taken, if relevant, And then any imaging that was done for the patient. So, uh, ultrasound X rays, every anything like that, Uh, any other more specific investigations that were done? And did these investigations fall under a flow chart or guideline that the doctors used to to to do it and then you want to move on to the diagnosis, if any, or, uh, the differentials that were presented and you want to be very, very specific. And lastly, you want to talk about the management. So what did the patient receive? Which treatments did they get? Which one's worked? Which ones didn't and over here have to think about the indications indications of certain treatments because, uh, I'll move on to explain this after, but this is what this is potentially something that you can be talking about in your evidence based discussion section. Yeah, and then think about what happened after. So what was prognosis with the patient? Did they symptoms resolve where they discharged when any follow ups made And, uh, what were they discharged with? And perhaps a community care package? Medications, anything like that. And lastly, have a sentence to include, uh, something on patient consent that you obtain patient consent for this clinical case. Um, and this is, uh this is taken from your assessment brief, and I just underlined the sort of the important words that are on assessment brief. So make make your case summary, concise, and describe the uniqueness of the case. So what is special about the actual patient itself or the investigation that patient had and everything in a chronological order. So moving on to the evidence based discussion, this is essentially your section where you bring together your clinical scenario that you just presented to your reader and discuss it with existing literature and evidence surrounding it. And here you want to explain the rationale for reporting the case and state any lessons to be learned about from this case and what could have been done differently, if any. So there's two different directions that you can take your evidence of discussion. This is again from your assessment brief, and a lot of people have been asking about which direction that they should be focusing on. And, um, sometimes the direction could have been pre decided by your course leads. So make sure you check up on that. And and if not, I personally found that the second are the second arm that talking about the treatment was easiest to write about. This is because, although in both directions in both pathways, you talk, you're bringing together literature and sort of discussing it. It was a lot easier to read about treatments and supporting evidence of the treatment and guidelines, as opposed to looking at the mechanisms of injury, the path of physiology, all the needs, sort of, uh, molecules and uh, signaling pathways that were existing there. And, um, these two pathways aren't mutually exclusive. So imagine you're talking about the treatments. It might be useful for you to just have a sentence or two talking about the path of physiology, of how x drug interacts with whatever in in in the patient's body. And, uh, that gives a better clinical picture. So it's not like you can you can only focus on one pathway. Um, it But yeah, if if that makes sense, uh, moving on. So where do you start searching? So this is, uh, where you need to perform your own literature search? Um, there'll be many, many different papers involved once you start searching. So keep a track and a summary of each paper that you read, and you'll eventually have to select up to the 15 best ones. And what type of papers can you reference? Um, so the task will mostly want you to look at primary research articles. So our CTS case control studies, um, stuff like that and these should form the bulk of your references. You can include some good systematic reviews and meta analyses, as well as including guidelines. The guidelines are definitely a good, uh, good to include, but make sure you don't use any literature reviews. Um, but do you take a look at the references for any primary research articles, and this is because you don't want to be using someone else's appraisal of the field. The task is for you to form your own critical appraisal, your own appraisal of the field and by using any literature reviews or a lot of systematic reviews and meta analyses, you're not actually formulating your own opinions, and they want they want to see how you're sort of gathering all the evidence and sort of formulating that mhm. So I'll just could quickly talk about the path of physiology route and then the treatment route. So despite me not having done my SSC on the path of this on the path of physiology of the disease, um, I've read through some examples and had to have a have had a thought about what sort of discussion point you could have, um, so, firstly, start off with a quick introduction to the path of physiology of the disease, what the current mechanisms are and also include any existing signaling pathways or predispositions to the condition that the patient has and and this is conferred to your patient's presentation. Um, and then, um, again, look, um, have to think about any of the interactions of of this of this, um, of the genetics signaling pathways. Everything involved, Um, and there's a lot of critical appraisal involved in this in this task, and you want to work, you're critical analysis. Partly. So say you have a really good paper with a good conclusion, but it's there's there's quite a few limitations to the paper. Make sure you word you're critical analysis in a very in a way that brings out the good aspects of the paper. So, for example, study a could be limited in its size sample side. However, it's first in its field and encourages for the research on X Y and zed enhancement would be still relevant to this field. So, um, you'll have a lot of papers and to talk about, and some of them might contradict each other. So you need to where you're critical analysis smartly that in the sense that it brings out the overall points that you want more. Um, also make sure you identify any areas of future research as well moving on to the treatment route. This is, uh, the one I wrote about, so I'll have a little bit more to talk about unfortunately for the path of physiology route. Um, so you again, you You want to start off with a quick introduction, perhaps about the pathophysiology of the disease or the rationale behind treatment choices. So my s I c was talking about prehospital blood products. And in the introduction to my, uh, even estimate discussion, I talked about why people use blood products. What are the uses for blood products? It helps. So it helps with increasing survival in and emergency scenarios where patients are bleeding a lot increasing oxygen capacity, capacity, stuff like that. So just, uh, give a good introduction, A small introduction, good small introduction in your evidence basis. Question. Have a talk about the current guidelines and diagnostic pathways was just followed in the patient's case. And if not, why? And, uh, in in in this section, you can also have to think about including any figures. For example, the diagnostic pathways. Uh, if it makes it easier to bring out the overall picture and then going to talk about your specific agent or investigation, talk about the benefits and limitations again, all of which should be backed up by evidence by the trials and use the critical analysis to strengthen your arguments. So say you're comparing Drug X and drug Y and drug X. You want to say that drug X is better than drug y in the way you word? You're critical analysis focus more on the advantages of drug X and the and the limitations of drug y. So it makes it makes you see my drug X is a little bit better is much better than drug y. Again, uh, you want to identify any areas of future research? This is quite an important small section. Maybe one part one small paragraph, Um, just to talk about what other things could be discussed, whether things could change in in the scenario representing, um and then lastly, moving on to the abstract. So this is, uh, as I said before, 250 words maximum and you want to structure it in. It's the easiest way. The easiest way to structure abstract is in the following heading. So in the introduction, the case, the discussion and the conclusion So I actually have, like, these separate subheadings in the abstract. So in an introduction, talk about what? The main focus of your case report is and then in the case summary keep it very simple. And short only includes the most most relevant information, uh, related to the case. Um, as the overall picture can actually be read in the main text, so keep it very, very short. The discussion should be a little bit of it. Should be covered to cover the longest section of the abstract. Essentially, your summarizing all of the literature that you're that you're presenting and you shouldn't have any critical analysis here. You're just giving a summary of what the evidence is saying. And then the conclusion should show the overall direction of the report. So what do you want to What is the report telling everyone? What's your overall message? Um, and then I'll move on to the tips. A few tips. I I have. So make sure you read some existing case reports. There are a lot of good examples on the BMJ case reports. If you just type on typical be mg case reports, uh, and click on the first link. You'll have access with your with your imperial um emails. And there's they literally have hundreds and thousands of case reports and some of them might even be related to what you're covering. So that's pretty good. Um, And then, uh, another tip is to read as many papers as you can and then cut down to the 10 15 most pertinent ones. So by doing a very thorough literature surgeon in and reading through the most papers possible, you'll sort of end up with a very good A very good, um, small group of papers that you want to include. Uh, you want to include in your case report, and this means that you're confident that the 10 15 people that you're including are the best ones out there. Also, make sure you explain all the abbreviations. For example, if you're right, if you're saying that patient had an MRI, make sure you write magnetic resonance imaging and in brackets MRI. If you want to keep mentioning the abbreviation afterwards, um, and I as I as you probably know, the word count is quite limited. 2500 words for the evidence based discussion only like around 1000 words. So, uh, there's a lot for you to talk about, but make sure from all the points that you could potentially talk about you talk about the most pertinent ones, but still acknowledge the other. The other points, Uh, the other points that you could potentially talk about. For example, Um uh, as I said before, I was looking at the pre hospital blood blood products. And this could be red blood cells, plasma and platelets. And I decided to only focus on red blood cells and plasma because these two are them, ones are most used. And then I included a small sentence saying, Uh, despite platelets being potential prehospital blood product, this case report will not be focusing on platelets because it's not very commonly used in clinical medicine, and then that acknowledges that it's still it still exists. And the Examiner knows that you've covered it. But, you know, you understand why they and they understand why you're not actually going to detail, um, and make sure that your whole report report flows like a story, uh, make it, uh, make sure that the message is sort of sort of clear throughout the whole report. As as I've said before, they want you to present something unique. So it should be something that flows Well, uh, it's interesting for the reader to read throughout. And lastly, make sure you have a read of your module. One I see is feedback. I personally found myself getting a lot better at doing critical analysis as I go through out, uh, as the year progressed. So, uh, and this was partially because I was looking back at the feedback on how I could, uh, differently how I could critical praise things in different ways. Um, but essentially, that's it for the talk. There is, uh I know it's been quite short, but, um, if anyone has any questions at all, please ask them in the chat. And, um and my email is also here, So if you send me an email afterwards as well, I'm happy to answer any questions. Mhm. Okay, uh, focusing on management. How much detail when you have to go? I went to school, to be honest, not much detail. So the question is, if you're focusing on the management section, how much detail would you need sort of in the other parts of the case summary. So not much, only only the ones that would be relevant. That would be relevant. Um, for the management, say uh, say your patient Say you're talking about, uh, giving a drug for Yeah, So Okay, so Okay, so, uh, say, um, you're so okay, I'll give my s s e as an example. Uh, they were given prehospital blood product, so that was the main focus of the sort of the S I see. And then the investigations part, they were they they had a lot of different investigations that they did. However, I only talked about the ones that were relevant to them eventually getting the blood products. So it was that they had, uh, they were showing signs of shock. Um, they were showing, like the h b, uh, platelets. Everything was quite on. Whether on the lower side stuff like that you don't have to go on to talk about, for example, uh, electrolyte like, um, things that wouldn't be relevant to why the patient received their their their treatment, if that makes sense. Um, and then one tip that just came up to the top of my head is, um if the easiest way to start writing your s I see is by summarizing your clinical case first, so you have sort of a good picture of the pertinent topics, uh, of the pertinent topics that you want to cover and then do your literature search based on the topic. So make sure you concise your clinical summary first and then focus on the evidence around finding that related to what you say. Um, any other questions for the treatment route? We describe the advantages and limitations of the actual treatment. Would we need to do the same for, uh, the potential treatments before the critical analysis? So it depends on how much you're mentioning. If you're actually just comparing 11 treatment to another, then it will be good for you. Like it'll be good to explain the other one. The other treatment in depth as well. But if there's a lot of different things that you're talking about, then not really. Um, but it would be. It's dependent on how you want to structure it. Uh, sorry how how many things you're talking about in the evidence based section, but it would be a good idea to give a brief, a brief sort of introduction to the other potential treatment that you're talking about, or if it's like a treatment with a similar mechanism you can you can just, uh, if it's essentially the same treatment. But what I work in a slightly different way. You can just add a sentence in whilst you're doing a critical analysis. Are we supposed to critically appraise each paper you use? Technically, yes. Um, so it's good to appraise each evidence that you have. Sometimes it's not. It's not possible because of the word count. So just pick out the papers out, have the most critical like that will give you the best critical appraisal and then include that critical appraisal, but also, um, in terms of critical appraisal, you don't have to critically praised each paper. So say you have two studies that are very are very similar, uh, but are showing X are showing two things. But one of the limitation is that both of them have a small sample size. You can just critically praised both papers at once by saying, um, paper a and paper be show, show show X, y and Z, which is good. And then, uh, no. However, both have a limited sample sizes, which which means that we can, uh, the General, the General General, realize ability of the papers is limited. Some something like that, if that makes sense. Um, how many systematics reviews do you recommend we limit ourselves to? I personally only used one, Um, because there were quite a few that I found, and I only used one the one where I couldn't find any other good primary papers. So this one was a good, systematic review that helped me with the evidence that I needed, But it's up to you, but I would recommend you. You try to use more primary papers. Um, systematic reviews are Some of them might be really good and feel free to use those. Um, but usually they will have a direction like overall, overall flow to the paper already so that it can be hard to. It can be hard to generate your own sort of interpretations. That makes sense. Um, I would say if you want a number, maybe one or two, to be honest, one or two, max and then have a look at guidelines have a look at, uh, other primary papers. And then even the primary, the primary papers that they use in the systematic reviews. Uh, how many references would you recommend be allocated to another potential treatment to Allah. Critical appraisal. Honestly, there's no right answer to this. Um, it it literally depends as in to say, which is superior. Well, the thing is, you you having more references for one treatment doesn't mean that it's superior to the other one. Uh, it might just be that there's a little a little bit more to discuss about that treatment, so I wouldn't really be worried about that. Just make sure you have enough. There's enough evidence there for you to to talk about these, these treatments in depth and critically prism. If that makes sense, there's there's no right answer to this. Unfortunately, uh, I think we'll wait a few more minutes for any other questions and then call it a day. Uh, I hope it was useful. Everyone, Um, if again, if you have any questions after the talk, feel free to email me my short coats up there, Um and I hope, Yeah, kind. I hope he's been useful. I hope it's sort of giving you a good a good introduction on how to write or how to start writing your s. I see, um, and which aspects to focus on more. Also, if you haven't already, please fill in the feedback. It's really helpful. It's ended quite early, so I'm going to the rest of the evenings. You must be quite tired after literature review. Hope it's going well, though, Okay? It doesn't look like anyone has any more questions. Um, I was just, like, wait, because the last talk when I said that then like two or three people ask questions after, like, a low of three minutes. So, um yeah, there's no more questions. We might end it here. But if you do have a question, please, please do send it in the chart. Yeah, it's quite a straightforward task in the sense that you just have to follow what's been given to you. There's not much flexibility to it as it unlike the literature review part. So yeah, Okay. I'm assuming no one has any questions, so I think we'll end it here. Amazing. Thank you all for coming. Thank you so much. Pedro. That talk was amazing. It was so concise as well. I felt like it was just all the information I needed to know with the comfort of someone who had done it before telling me. Um yeah, No worries. Mhm. Okay, Yeah. I think I'll end it here. So you're welcome to leave. And then once we leave, it'll end there and then the report will be released. Amazing. Right. Good stuff. Thank you for having me. No, thank you for coming by.