The ICS is fortunate to have many productive committee members from varied disciplines. Ideas are generated at every turn. In order to best serve the academic endeavours within the organisation, the ICS would like to facilitate centralised coordination of committee educational and academic work.
This paper specifies the procedure which should be followed in order to propose and produce an ICS Consensus Paper. A Consensus paper will outline the general agreement related to (and not limited to) a procedure or treatment. This can be in the format of a guideline document or algorithm or general advice. A Consensus paper will often be produced where there is a lack of published evidence surrounding the technique or where there has been a general agreement or needs assessment to change the current published recommendations, or to create these if they do not exist.
For the purposes of this procedure the production will be referred to as the “paper”.
The final product should:
• Have a clearly outlined topic and learning objective.
• Have a clearly defined specific topic to be presented/researched.
• If applicable, the final paper should be published in Neurourology & Urodynamics (NAU), or otherwise have a plan for dissemination and reaching target groups. If the paper is not to be published in NAU then this should be indicated in the proposal.
It is noted that the person(s) who submit the application to the Board of Trustees will be the working group chair. The Board will assess at the time of submission that the person(s) are of good character and are upstanding members of the ICS. In addition, in order to preserve the integrity of the peer review process of NAU, while allowing fast track publishing of ICS work, the content should be reviewed and approved by any relevant ICS Committees and Institutes, the ICS Board of Trustees, and 3-4 separate peer reviewers who are not part of the working group. In addition, the final draft will be peer reviewed by the ICS membership at large for the purposes of feedback.
Creation of Working/Committees
Please follow the SOP for creation of a working group here.
Disclosure and sponsorship guidelines
Please follow the ICS SOP for Disclosure and sponsorship when creating content here
- The ICS Board of Trustees will not provide financial support for face to face meetings of any group preparing content but will consider budget proposals with economy travel for videoing the content if it is relevant to prepare the content for online viewing.
- The ICS office will assist with setting up a forum for the group to exchange ideas and content for review. The office can also provide support for teleconferences or WebEx meetings, upon approval of a budget request.
- Normally, from its inception, a paper should take no longer than 6 months to prepare.
- ICS standard terminology should be used throughout.
ICS Consensus Statement or ICS Guidelines project creation procedure
|Proposal Stage||Creation of committee/working group/individual to prepare proposal.||This can be a committee that has decided to prepare a paper, an Institute Director or sub group of a School, or an ICS member or group of members. The proposal could also be suggested by an Industry contact. It is noted that the person(s) who have submitted the application to the Board of Trustees will be the working group chair. The Board will assess at the time of submission that the person(s) are of good character and are upstanding members of the ICS.|
|Proposal Stage||Proposal is sent to ICS office. Proposal format is according to the ICS Content Proposal Form Budget and proposal is sent to ICS office. The proposal should explain the need for the paper in no more than 2 pages specifying aims and objectives, learning outcomes, author expertise, target audience and requirement for content. Budget will only cover the costs of filming and editing costs. Budget can be prepared in conjunction with the ICS Office who can assist with the best way to record. The group should indicate 3-4 independent reviewers or ask for assignment. These reviewers are notified that they have been selected by the office.||The ICS Office will ensure no overlap with other working groups or projects and will advise the appropriate members should this be the case. The ICS office will notify the New Project Proposal group which is made up of all ICS Committee Chairs, all Institute Directors and the Board of Trustees. Any budget request to be approved by Board of Trustees. Feedback may be given at this early stage. The office may propose additional contributors for the project. The Board of Trustees are also to indicate whether any other Society is to be informed of the paper where Memorandum of Understandings exist.|
|Creation of working group||Applications are made transparent and in accordance with the SOP.||Call for applications from the ICS Membership in conjunction with ICS office. If WG is to include other societies then ICS office to work in conjunction with other Society administration office to make joint call for members.|
|Working Group selection||Review working group applications||This is undertaken by the Working Group chair and is in accordance with the Working Group Creation SOP|
|Preparatory Stage||Working group prepares content and where relevant reviews the literature and prepares the manuscript. Where relevant a DELPHI system and ‘PRISMA -checklist/guidelines’ should be used.||Office will assist with creating online fora for easy discussion and monitoring/chasing if required.|
|Peer Review Stage||Draft paper is placed on ICS website and presented to ICS membership for comment. In addition, where possible there will be an open session meeting at the ICS Annual Meeting to allow for open discussion of the document. Special email to be sent to Board of Trustees so that they can comment on content at this appropriate time.||Comments by ICS members and stakeholders. Special email to be sent to Board of Trustees so that they can comment on content at this appropriate time. If they are an expert within the field being discussed then their expert knowledge is encouraged.Document should be reviewed within 3 weeks.|
|Content Review Stage||Manuscript is sent to the 3-4 independent ICS experts as well as the appropriate Committees and Institute Directors or Appointees. The independent reviewers are to provide constructive feedback to the authors. This feedback will need to be seriously considered and incorporated into the manuscript where appropriate.||The experts should respond within 3 weeks with appropriate feedback.|
|Final Review Stage||The final revised manuscript and slide set are sent to the Education, Standardisation Steering Committee, and any relevant ICS Committee. It should be noted that the Education and Standardisation committees are not commenting on the content of the module but are reviewing for educational value and terminology adherence.||These Committees should respond within 2 weeks.|
|Sign off||The Board of Trustees are to have final review and sign off.||The Board of Trustees should sign off within 1 week or advise of any final adjustments needed. Any feedback will need to be seriously considered and incorporated into the content where appropriate.|
|Publication Stage||Once approved by the Board of Trustees the paper can be sent for publication in the ICS Journal NAU.||Article submitted to NAU should clearly reference International Continence Society (ICS) and the Committee involved in the creation of the paper followed by the authors.|
|Implementation Stage||Once completed the ICS office will disseminate the content via the ICS website, social media and other outlets.|
Standard text for title of report for submission to NAU.
• [Title]: A Report from the XXXX Committee of the International Continence Society
• [Title]: A Report from the XXXX Working Group of the International Continence Society
• An International Continence Society (ICS)/ (INSERT SOCIETY HERE) joint report on [Title]
• International Continence Society Guidelines on [Title]