1012P- ABSTRACT REVIEWER FORM RESIDENTS UNDERSTANDING BIOSTATISTICS

Reviewer Name : Prof Omar Hasan Kasule
Abstract Title:  Residents Understanding Biostatistics
Scoring Criteria			Grades					Total
1.	Significance
		Allocated Score = 20	1	2	3	4	5
	a.	Is the issue addressed relevant to KFMC?					√	0
	b.	Is the issue addressed relevant to KSA?			√
	c.	Is the issue addressed relevant to Region?			√
	d.	Is the issue addressed relevant Globally?	√
	e.	Does the work add to what is already in the published literature?				√		0
			Total					0
2.	Purpose/ Objectives are clearly described
		Allocated Score = 10	1	2	3	4	5
	a.	Was the objective of the study sufficiently described?					√	0
	b.	Was the question clearly defined?					√	0
			Total					0
3.	Methods are appropriate and well described
		Allocated Score = 30	1	2	3
	a.	Was the study design described?					√	0
	b.	Was the study design appropriate to achieve the objective?					√	0
	c.	Were the study subjects adequately described?					√	0
	d.	Was the condition adequately described?					√	0
	e.	Were interventions or exposures (when applicable) well defined?						0
	f.	Were outcome measures clearly described?					√	0
	g.	Were outcome measures appropriate?						0
	h.	Were statistical analysis procedures used clear and appropriate?						0
	i.	Was confounding addressed? (such as adjusting for prognostic factors by multivariate analysis when applicable)		√				0		Background differences like a prior statistics course mentioned but not explored in more detail
	j.	Was bias addressed through design or analysis? (such as selection bias, treatment allocation bias, measurement bias, attrition bias, performance bias, detection bias, etc.)		√				0
			Total					0
4.	Results/outcome are clearly and appropriately described
		Allocated Score = 15	1	2	3	4	5
	a.	Was the data presentation satisfactory for all important variables and outcomes?					√	0
	b.	Were appropriate summary data used? (for example, descriptive statistics [Mean, %], effect estimates [RR, OR, HR, etc..] for outcomes, appropriate comparisons)					√	0
	c.	Were confidence intervals or p-values given for the main results (when applicable)?				√		0
			Total					0
5.	Conclusions/implications for results are clearly described, supported by the results, and related to the objective
		Allocated Score = 15	1	2	3	4	5
	a.	Was the conclusion / interpretation justified / warranted by the data?					√	0
	b.	Was the research question answered?					√	0
	c.	Are the conclusions accompanied by appropriate caveats?		√				0
			Total					0
6.	Presentation
		Allocated Score = 15	1	2	3	4	5
	a.	Is it organized / structured /interesting?					√	0
	b.	Is it clearly written?					√	0
	c.	Is the English adequate?					√	0
			Total					0
			Grand Total					0