Phase IV Quick Outline of Work
- Present progress and respond to Phase III feedback
- Read and adjust project proposal based on reviewer feedback
- Create high-level overview presentation of project analysis plan and
progress
- Identify project adjustments and concerns for discussion
- Complete end-to-end data analysis
- Run all steps of the proposed analysis plan on the selected data at
least once
- Identify potential fine tunings to analysis plan methods or
parameters to further refine the models, and improve the
methodologies
- Clinical interpretation of all results
- Create a cohesive narrative that connects the key findings of the
analysis to each other and to the clinical question
- Explain the key results of the analysis with supporting figures and
tables
- Anchor the key findings to previously known understanding in the
literature
- Articulate the rationale of why the selected statistical or machine
learning techniques were the correct ones to employ
- Submit and review Phase IV reports
Phase IV Submissions and Deadlines
- [year-long
overview]
- Phase IV Progress Presentation / Discussion (18 min
present & discuss): 5 pts, Sep 9 - Nov 1 @ [Zoom]
- Phase IV Report (around 7 pg team report): 25pts,
Fri, Nov 8 @ [link]
- Phase IV Peer Evaluations (3 report evals): 9pts,
Wed, Nov 20 @ [link]
Progress Presentation Sessions
- Phase Objectives
- PP-1. Present your project importance and progress quickly to a
generalized audience
- PP-2. Prepare responses to written reviews and respond to feedback
and questions from a live audience
- PP-3. Identify project risks and weaknesses and solicit assistance
from other scientists/researchers
- PP-4. Participate in and provide valuable contributions to
data-related scientific discussions science
- Session Format
- Each one-hour Zoom session will focus on three projects with twenty
minutes allocated to each project. Course staff and all students and
mentors from the three teams will be encouraged to attend, share their
video, and engage in the discussion throughout. With a team’s twenty
minutes, the following is expected to occur:
- Team presentation [~ 12 minutes]
- [~2 min] A quick overview of the project’s importance, goals, and
progress through previous phases
- [~3 min] Responses based on the most valuable feedback from the
previous phases, either answers to important questions asked or
significant alterations to project plan based on reviewer comments
- [~6 min] Present analysis results, including choice of models,
tuning selections, model evaluations, and result interpretation
- [~1 min] Possible discussion questions for the faculty audience or
peers about project struggles or unknowns
- Group Discussion [~ 7 mins]
- Audience questions and feedback and discussion of team concerns The
5pts of this session will be based on student participation in the
session throughout the hour.
- 1 pt - Engaging with other teams’ discussion in a meaningful way
(speaking or via chat)
- 4 pt - Participating in own team’s presentation and discussion
End-to-end Analysis Report
- Phase Objectives
- P4-1. Describe your complete analysis methods in a concise manner to
a general audience
- P4-2. Identify method revisions, additions, and fine-tunings that
should be completed for the final analysis
- Overview
- In Phase IV, your report draft should describe your complete
analysis at a concise level that is understandable to the general
audience of your targeted journal audience with enough detail that would
allow other researchers to replicate your results
- Evaluation of the report for its description of the
analysis will be based on if it:
- Provides descriptions and justifies the use of data source(s)
- Clearly describes the data extraction, pre-processing, selection,
and transformation processes
- Justifies and clearly describes analysis methods that correspond to
presented results
- Contains enough package, methods, and parameter detail to allow for
replication of analysis
- Indicates additional methodological revisions and fine-tunings
planned for final analysis
- Discusses the potential shortcomings or future refinements of
analysis approach
Results Presentation and Clinical Interpretation
- Phase Objectives
- P4-3. Identify a potential journal or venue where you could submit
your report
- P4-4. Learn how to build an easy-to-follow narrative around your key
results appropriate for your target audience and anchored to your
clinical questions
- P4-5. Support your findings with specific results from the
analysis
- P4-6. Provide context to your findings by relating them to what is
known in literature.
- Overview
- In Phase IV, you should create a draft presentation of your key
findings, building an easy-to-follow narrative that indicates to the
reader how the findings relate to your clinical question, the analysis
results, and prior knowledge in related literature.
- Evaluation of the report for its results
presentation and clinical interpretation will be based on whether it:
- Clinical rationale of analysis is understandable to audience of the
targeted journal
- Presents, summarizes, and interprets key results connected to the
clinical question
- Supports key results with tables, figures, and/or significance
values
- Provides clear connections of analysis findings to the known
literature
Updated and Revised Phase IV Report
In this phase, your primary objective is to complete the initial
draft of your end-to-end data analysis. By the end of this phase, you
should have executed all the analyses outlined in your project proposal
on your selected data. You should also have identified potential
iterations to fine-tune your models, refine hypotheses, improve
methodologies, and interpret your results in a meaningful way. Your
report should articulate the statistical or machine learning techniques
employed, the rationale behind their selection, and how the results
contribute to the overall objectives of your research.
A special requirement of this phase is to pick a potential
target journal or venue of submission. Please be mindful that
the targeted journal should fit the overall goal and scope of your
project. If your targeted journal accepts more than one article type,
please indicate which article type best aligns with your report. For
example, you should not target a journal that only publishes review-type
articles. You should find and include the webpage link with the
journal’s submission criteria and start formatting your report
to match your targeted journal’s style/format.
The report format should include the following sections:
- Title, Authors, and Affiliation
- Add a line with the name of a potential target journal for
submission and a link to their submission criteria. (New)
- Project Abstract (Revised)
- Draft findings: Include the high-level findings that result from
your analysis.
- Introduction and Literature Review (Revised)
- Analysis Methods
- Descriptions and figure(s) for data extraction, pre-processing,
selection, transformation, and analysis (Revised)
- Specifics about the data manipulation, statistics, or machine
learning packages, models, and parameters used in the analysis
(Revised)
- Comprehensive Data Analysis Results
- Dataset Summary Statistics: Provide an overview of your dataset
contents to provide context (Revised)
- Key Findings: Highlight the most important outcomes from each step
of your analysis and your initial interpretations (New)
- Analysis Support: Summarize the rationale of applying your
models/approach and how they were used and evaluated (New)
- Model Tuning: Summarize the steps taken or needed to optimize your
models, including parameter adjustments and any cross-validation
techniques (New)
- References - cited throughout and listed at the end (Revised)
The length of this report is expected to be equivalent to around 7
pages of 12 pt single-spaced text, not counting any figures, tables, or
bibliography sections. It should also only contain the most important
figures and tables for understanding the analysis and the results.
Additional material from previous phases can be included in a single (or
zipped directory) supplementary file.
- Supplementary Figures, Tables, and Methods (Revised)
- Figures, tables, and additional methods descriptions/code that are
included in the supplement, should have proper numbering and
descriptions, and be cited in the main report text.
Report Evaluation: Submissions will be evaluated by faculty and peers
on the following:
- Abstract and literature review is clear, concise, and
comprehensive
- Updates previous phase content (abstract, literature review,
methods, dataset description, references, etc)
- Organizes report with clear flow, integrating materials across
phases
- Figures and tables are numbered, cited, and interpretable by
reader
- Supplementary content is cleanly cited and organized
- Follows professional journal style with correct tone, spelling, and
grammar
Critical Evaluation of Peer Reports
- Phase Objectives for evaluation
- E-1. Read, understand, and think critically about the research
presented in the reports of your peers
- E-2. Assess the soundness of proposed and reported research in
domains outside your expertise by finding and comparing to external
literature sources.
- E-3: Provide meaningful and professional peer review feedback that
resembles a medical journal review process
- Phase Peer Evaluations: We will assign every student to review three
submitted reports each phase and provide valuable feedback to their
peers. The purpose of this exercise is to give reviewers exposure to the
efforts and outputs of other teams and exercise the ability to read and
think critically about analyses in other domains presented to them and
practice communicating their questions or suggestions. For the teams
reviewed, this provides additional outside perspectives on the
presentation and direction of their project that they have the chance to
consider and respond to. We expect peer reviews to contain
Meaningful Feedback, defined as
- advice for fixing content errors (not grammatical errors) in the
presentation, organizing the information in different ways to make it
easier for the audience to follow, or suggestions for alternative
methodology, research questions, or interpretation of findings which may
constitute a future improvement to the work.
- Some resources for how to perform and write a meaningful review can
be found at the paper, How
to Review a Clinical Research Paper or the JEE
reviewer guidelines