Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 14, 2025
Project-Based Learning Guidelines for Health Sciences Students: An Analysis with Data Mining and Qualitative Techniques
Published on: December 9, 2022
Study Groups and POSNA: A Review of Podium Presentations From 2006 to 2020
Hillary E Mulvey1, Mitchell A Johnson1,2, Andrew Parambath1
1Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania.
Background:
Study groups are multicenter collaborations aimed at improving orthopaedic decision-making through higher-powered, more generalizable studies. New research is disseminated through peer-reviewed literature and academic meetings, including the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America (POSNA) annual meeting, which brings together academic and medical professionals in pediatric orthopaedics. The goal of this study was to identify patterns in podium presentations (PP) at the POSNA annual meeting resulting from multicenter study groups during a 15-year period.
Methods:
A total of 2065 PP from the 2006 to 2020 POSNA annual meetings were identified. The abstracts of each PP were reviewed to determine if they resulted from a multicenter study group and for characteristics including subspecialty focus. PP from 2006 to 2018 were further reviewed for publication in academic journals. Pearson correlation was used to assess change in the number of PP resulting from study groups overtime. Univariate analysis was used to compare characteristics of PP based on study group involvement (significance P<0.05).
Results:
The proportion of PP resulting from study groups increased from 2.2% (n=2) in 2006 to 9.4% in 2020 (n=16) (R2=0.519, P=0.002). Of the PP resulting from study groups, 52.9% focused on spine, 26.5% on hip, 2.9% on sports, and 2.0% on trauma. This is compared with a distribution of 16.7% (P<0.001) spine, 15.9% (P=0.005) hip, 9.5% (P=0.026) sports, and 14.6% (P<0.001) trauma focus of PP not from study groups. There was no difference in publication rate of PP resulting from study groups compared with those that were not (69.1% vs. 66.2%, P=0.621).
Conclusions:
In the 15-year period from 2006 to 2020, there was a nearly 5-fold increase in the proportion of POSNA PP resulting from study groups. Spine surgery is disproportionately supported by study groups, suggesting that there is an opportunity to establish new study groups across the breadth of pediatric orthopaedics.
Level Of Evidence:
Level V.
More Related Videos
14:43A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
06:05The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
Related Concept Videos
01:19Impact of Groups on Groups
01:28Impact of Groups on Individuals
01:28Preclinical Development: Overview
01:15Study Design in Statistics
Does aspirin reduce the risk of heart attacks? Is one brand of fertilizer more effective at growing roses than another? Is fatigue as dangerous to a driver as the influence of alcohol? Questions like these are answered using randomized experiments with proper...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:20Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...