MSIS Paper Grading Guidlines

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0 height="100%"><tr> <td valign="top" width=120 BGCOLOR="#DDDDDD" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Home Page"><U><IMG SRC="32852520.jpg" border=0 width="82" height="82" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id197.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="2011 Abstract Submission"><U>Abstract Submission</U></A></div> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" BGCOLOR="#BBBBBB" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <B>M</B><FONT SIZE="6" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Trebuchet MS" ><B>usculo</B></FONT><B>S</B><FONT SIZE="6" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Trebuchet MS" ><B>keletal </B></FONT><B>I</B><FONT SIZE="6" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Trebuchet MS" ><B>nfection </B></FONT><B>S</B><FONT SIZE="6" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Trebuchet MS" ><B>ociety</B></FONT></div> <bR> <bR> <div> MSIS Paper Grading System </div> <bR> <div> General Guidelines:</div> <bR> <div>   Abstracts are blinded to author and center of origin upon receipt, and remain blinded until selection is completed. The Program Chairman chooses the selection committee, which consists of the Program chairman plus at least 2 additional people. The selection committee collectively has experience with paper selection as undertaken by peer reviewed publications and/or national meetings. Those grading the papers will seek advice on topics outside their areas of expertise. All reviewers are active in the final ranking and selection.</div> <bR> <div> The papers are marked out of 10. (No decimal marking. i.e. a score is 7, not 7.3.)</div> <div> The cut off for an acceptable paper on the program is 7.</div> <div>         </div> <div> Scoring Criteria</div> <bR> <div> Points </div> <bR> <div>     1     Is the topic relevant (within the spectrum of musculoskeletal infection)? </div> <div>               <FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" ><I>NB- papers that are not specifically related to musculoskeletal infection </I></FONT></div> <div> <I>                cannot be considered for presentation at an annual meeting</I></div> <div>     1     Is there a logical progression from established knowledge to the experimental question?</div> <div>     1     Is the study question clearly stated?</div> <div>     2     Is the methodology scientifically correct and appropriate to answer the question?</div> <div>              (Clinical Trials-  A strong paper is prospective, randomized, and multi-centered;</div> <div>               Retrospective studies can be acceptable.)</div> <div>               Sample size needs to have enough power.</div> <div>    1     Were the Results clearly stated objective data with appropriate statistical analysis? </div> <div>    1     Are the Conclusions and Significance of the findings supported by the results, and do they clearly answer the study question?</div> <div>    1     Is the study complete, or does work fail to answer  the question?</div> <div> <U>   2</U>     Subjective Assessment         +/- New or Pivotal information, scientific validity, etc</div> <div>  10</div> <bR> <bR> <div>  </div> <div> These guidelines are utilized to permit consistency in the assessment and selection of papers .</div> <bR> <bR> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>