Search

Objectives: Survey studies are a commonly used method for data collection in surgical education research. Nevertheless, studies investigating survey design and response rates in surgical education research are lacking. The aim of this study was to gain an insight into survey response rates among surgical residents and medical students, and provide an initial reporting guideline for future survey studies in this field.Design: PubMed (MEDLINE) was systematically searched for survey studies in surgical education from January 2007 until February 2020, according to the PRISMA statements checklist. Study selection was conducted by 2 authors, independently. Surveys directed at surgical residents and/or medical students were included if data on response rates was available. Studies reporting solely from nonsurgical fields of medicine, paramedicine, or nursing were excluded. Subgroup analyses were performed, comparing response rates for varying modes of survey, per country, and for the 10 journals with the most identified surveys.Results: From the 5,693 records screened for a larger surgical survey database, a total of 312 surveys were included; 173 studies focused on surgical residents and 139 on medical students. The mean (SD) response rate was 55.7% (24.7%) for surgical residents and 69.0% (20.8%) for medical students. The number of published surveys increased yearly, mostly driven by an increase in surgical resident surveys. Although most surveys were Web-based (n = 166, 53.2%), this survey mode resulted in the lowest response rates (mean 52.6%). The highest response rates, with a mean of 79.8% (13.1%), were seen in in-person surveys (n = 89, 28.5%). Wide variations in response rates were seen between different countries and journals.Conclusions: Web-based surveys are gaining popularity for medical research in general and for surgical education specifically; however, this mode results in lower response rates than those of in-person surveys. The response rate of in-person surveys is especially high when focusing on medical students. To improve reporting of survey studies, we present the first step towards a reporting guideline.

Disorders related to the autosomal transcription factor MEF2C located in 5q14.3 were first described in 2009 and have since evolved to one of the more common microdeletion syndromes. Mutational screening in a larger cohort revealed heterozygous de novo mutations of MEF2C in about 1% of patients with moderate to severe intellectual disability, and the phenotype is similar in patients with intragenic deletions and multigenic microdeletions. Clinically, MEF2C-related disorders are characterized by severe intellectual disability with absent speech and limited walking abilities, hypotonia, seizures, and a variety of minor brain anomalies. The majority of patients show a similar facial gestalt with broad forehead, flat nasal bridge, hypotonic mouth, and small chin, as well as strabismus, but this phenotype is clinically not well recognized. The course of the disease is generally quite uniform, but patients with point mutations and smaller deletions seem to have a higher chance of walking skills and a lower risk of refractory seizures. Patients in whom the microdeletion also includes the RASA1 gene show features of the respective capillary and arterio-venous malformations and fistula syndrome. The phenotypic overlap with Rett syndrome is explained by a shared pathway and, accordingly, diminished MECP2 and CDKL5 expression is measureable in patients with MEF2C defects. Further research of this pathway may therefore eventually lead to a common therapeutic target.