Survey to Review:Applicant Name First Last Applicant Institution Survey Title HypothesisBackgroundFinal Version of SurveyMax. file size: 512 MB.Scoring SystemA composite score is generated based on a 5-point scale, and scored for each domain listed below. Please use the scoring guidelines associated with each domain. Significance Score(Required)Significance: Is the study topic relevant and significant to North American Skull Base Society membership? 1 – Very significant: Important priority that is very likely to affect practice 2 -Significant: Probably important and is likely to affect practice 3 – Uncertain significance: Could possibly affect practice 4-Likely not significant: Unlikely to affect practice 5 – Not significant: Not a priority and will not affect practice54321Innovation Score(Required)Innovation: Is the study question novel? 1 – Very novel: Fundamentally new study question 2 – Novel: New/useful way to address an old question 3 – Somewhat novel: Will provide some new information 4 – Update of data: The study has largely been done before, but updates old information 5 – Not novel: The same study has been recently published and/or is ongoing 54321Audience Score(Required)Audience: Is the study question broad enough to accrue a sufficient number of respondents from the NASBS membership? A greater audience will allow for a greater number of potential respondents and possibly more survey responses. 1 Very broad audience: Relevant to entire NASBS membership 2– Broad audience: Relevant to multiple, but not all subspecialties 3 – Somewhat broad audience: Relevant to multiple subspecialties, but limited in scope (anterior skull base, orbit, endonasal surgery, temporal bone, etc.) 4 – Limited audience: Relevant to only one subspecialty 5– Not relevant: Not relevant to NASBS membership54321Approach Score(Required)Approach: Based on the methods described, how likely is this study to confirm or refute the study hypothesis 1 – Very likely: Among the top 10% of submissions 2 – Likely: Among the top 11-25% of submissions 3 – Intermediate: Among the top 26-50% of submissions 4 – Unlikely: In the bottom 50% of submissions 5– Very unlikely: Fundamentally scientifically flawed 54321HiddenTotal ScoreConfidential Comments to Committee:Comments to the Survey Applicant (please provide comments about any strengths and weaknesses you would like to share with the Applicant, as the feedback is very helpful):(Required)HiddenGrant ID