Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Evaluating the accuracy and design of visual backgrounds in academic surgical journals
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Evaluating the accuracy and design of visual backgrounds in academic surgical journals
Do you wish to request the book?
Evaluating the accuracy and design of visual backgrounds in academic surgical journals
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Evaluating the accuracy and design of visual backgrounds in academic surgical journals
2022
Overview
Background: The objective of this study was to assess the quality and accuracy of visual backgrounds published in academic surgical journals. Visual backgrounds are commonly used to disseminate medical research findings. They distill the key messages of a research article, presenting them graphically in an engaging manner so that potential readers can decide whether to read the complete manuscript. Methods: We developed a Visual Background Assessment Tool based upon published guidelines. Seven reviewers underwent iterative training to apply the tool. We collected visual backgrounds published by 25 surgical journals from January 2017 to April 2021; those corresponding to systematic reviews without meta-analysis, conference backgrounds, narrative reviews, video backgrounds, or nonclinical research were excluded. Included visual backgrounds were scored on accuracy (as compared with written backgrounds) and design and were given a first impression score. Results: Across 25 surgical journals, 1325 visual backgrounds were scored. We found accuracy deficits in the reporting of study design (35.8%), appropriate icon use (49%), and sample size reporting (69.2%) as well as design deficits in element alignment (54.8%) and symmetry (36.1%). Overall scores ranged from 9 to 14 (out of 15), accuracy scores ranged from 4 to 8 (out of 8), and design scores ranged from 3 to 7 (out of 7). No predictors of visual background score were identified. Conclusion: Visual backgrounds vary widely in quality. As visual backgrounds become integrated with the traditional components of scientific publication, they must be held to similarly high standards. We propose a checklist to be used by authors and journals to standardize the quality of visual backgrounds.
Publisher
CMA Impact, Inc
Subject
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.