The ICS strategy is to increase scientific and educational output and to become “the go to” society for scientific content. This Standard Operating Procedure outlines the process for working groups (WG) to create and publish ICS Standardisation and Terminology Reports under the auspices of the ICS Standardisation Steering Committee (SSC).
A WG is a group of ICS members (and non-members) brought together under an ICS committee(s) to work on a specific project. The outcome of which include:
• Creation of an informational document
• Creation of a standard
• Resolution of problems related to a system or network
• Continuous improvement
• A Peer reviewed paper published in Neurourology and Urodynamics (NAU)
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 will not provide financial support for face to face meetings of any ad hoc WG.
- The ICS office will assist with setting up a forum for the group to exchange ideas and content for review. The office can also offer facilities for teleconference or WebEx, upon approval of a budget request.
The WG of a Standardisation and Terminology report has a chairman who will:
- Check current ICS terminology to ensure that the most up to date terms are being utilised within the document.
- Propose the key question or topics of discussion to the committee, together with a strategic plan.
- Keep a digital working log of the WG activities (keeping the office informed of these plans) .
- Make sure that the composition of the WG is well balanced and that the process is transparent.
- Use web-based and e-mail exchange of information and monitor the execution of assignments within the assigned timeline.
- Adhere to evidence based medicine principles, where appropriate
- Report to the authorising Committee Chair on a regular basis copying in each Version to the Chair.
- Inform any relevant Institute Directors of the work during the proposal stage.
- Be responsible for production of a first draft of the report within a stipulated time frame (generally 12 months maximum as it can then take 18-24 months for the many rounds of consensus review of the document.)
- Be responsible for submission for publication and dissemination (if applicable)
Principles behind Terminology – based Standardisation Documents
- Documents will be of the highest quality, contemporary, interesting and a valuable contribution to the academic wealth of the ICS and if relevant collaborating societies.
- Definitions will be accurate, concise and, unless there is good cause, consistent.
Development of a Standardisation/Terminology document
|Proposal stage||Standardisation Steering Committee (SSC) or Board of Trustees identify topic that requires a standardisation document or an existing document that requires revision. Board of Trustees and Relevant Committees or Institutes are notified of any new proposal before work or recruitment for WG members begins. Proposal format is according to the ICS Content Proposal Form Technically any ICS member can initiate work through proposal to the SSC via the Glossary or the Terminology Discussions page.||Board of Trustees to identify any external society that needs notifying that project in process and decide whether to invite them to join project, keeping SSC Chair informed at all stages.|
|Creation of working group||Applications for Chairmanship and Membership made transparent. Any relevant ICS Committee and Institute is pre-advised of project in process.||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 Chair and Member selection||Review subject, Chair, Members, criteria, timeline and starting date. SSC appoint a mentor to assist WG.||SSC review Chair applications and appoint. Working group selection is undertaken by the SSC in conjunction with the WG chair. The mentor can be the SSC chair or another expert. Mentorship is providing guidance to the working group chair in aspects of procedure, working within the SOPs, and practical advice on running the group. It should be noted that pursuant to the role of mentor, no SSC member, including the Chair, will be a named author on the paper unless they contribute significantly to the intellectual content of the Standardisation. For the purpose of clarification, providing advice and guidance or reviewing the final manuscript does not count as a significant contribution, with such cases being added in acknowledgements. Any instances of the mentor being added as a named author must be approved in advance with reference to the WG Chair and the Board of Trustees SSC representative, describing the intended intellectual input. The SSC should then consider whether a new Mentor should be assigned.|
|Preparatory stage||WG constituted. SSC/WG members to identity a minimum of 4 and maximum of 8 independent experts to review document for next stage.Development of draft.||SSC evaluate progress and ensure adherence to timelines. Office invites independent experts to review document and gives them adequate notice to pre-warn them when document is ready for review.|
|Committee stage||Draft paper to be submitted to SSC Committee Chair and the SSC reviews document, suggests amendments/adjustments to document.||Review of the process and document against criteria of original project plan within 2 weeks of receiving draft. Approval by consensus.|
|Peer Review Stage||Draft 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 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. Document should be reviewed within 3 weeks. 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.|
|Content Review stage||Document is sent to the independent reviewers who are to provide constructive feedback to the authors. This feedback will need to be seriously considered and incorporated into the content where appropriate.||Document should be reviewed within 3 weeks.|
|Approval stage||WG makes final revisions and submits final document to SSC.||Process review. Document should be revised within 1 month.|
|Final sign off||Document is submitted to ICS Board of Trustees and they are asked to review the clarity of the document, rather than the science discussed within the report.||Board of Trustees must sign off or provide comments within 2 weeks. Any feedback will need to be seriously considered and incorporated into the content where appropriate.|
|Publication||Once approved the manuscript can be sent for publication in the ICS journal, NAU||ICS Office will ensure co-ordination of joint publication where applicable.|
|Implementation stage||Final text to ICS office for web publication.Once accepted at NAU the ICS office will disseminate the content via the ICS website, ICS TV, member emails, social media and other outlets. WG dissolved||Support implementation. Education of members and wider population. Register of comments. Identify research needs. Support health technology and economic assessment.The final PDF is made available on the SSC current documents folder. The working group chair will work with the SSC chair and wiki/terminology documents group to add their definitions on to the ICS glossary and ICS wiki/ terminology documents page.|
Standard text for title of report for submission to NAU.
• A Standard for Terminology in : A Report From the XXXX Working Group of the International Continence Society
• An International Continence Society (ICS)/ XXXSOCIETYXXX joint report on the standard for terminology for……