The Watershed: Early Career Stroke Debates
Where early career voices shape the future of stroke care through high‑energy, evidence‑based debate.
What is the Watershed?
Purpose of the Watershed
- Elevate Early Career voices
- Promote rigorous, scholarly debate and critical thinking
- Explore controversies shaping modern stroke care and training
- Strengthen communication and leadership skills
- Build a lasting archive of early career perspectives
ISC 2027 Debate Topics
Topic 1 — Mandatory Telestroke Training
Pro: Stroke fellowship should require a mandatory telestroke rotation.
Con: Telestroke exposure during stroke fellowship should be considered optional.
Topic 2 — Early Career Professionals as Stroke Directors
Pro: Early Career professionals should be considered for roles as stroke directors.
Con: Early Career professionals should not be considered for roles as stroke directors.
Call for Participation
Early Career members—including MD, DO, PhD, and other doctoral‑level professionals—are invited to select one topic and argue either the Pro or Con side in their application.
Apply to Participate in The Watershed
Submission Requirements
- Choose one of the 2027 topics
- Select Pro or Con
- Provide 5–10 structured arguments (bullet points welcome)
- Submit as Word or PDF, up to 500 words
- Complete and submit the application form
Eligibility
Open to Early Career members active in research and within 10 years of completing a terminal degree or highest certificate (e.g., MSc, PhD), or within 10 years of completing a medical fellowship or residency. Members meeting these criteria, including trainees, are invited to participate. Trainees include medical students, residents, and fellows.
Use of AI / Automated Assistive Writing Technologies and Tools
- The use of automated assistive writing technologies and tools (commonly referred to as artificial intelligence or machine learning tools) is permitted provided their use is documented, and authors assume responsibility for the content. The authors are responsible for the accuracy, validity and originality of computer-generated content. Automated assistive writing technologies do not qualify for authorship as they are unable to provide approval or consent for submission.
- If the use of these technologies has been used to carry out or generate analytical work, the tools utilized should be documented in the abstract.
- Not acceptable use:
- AI-generated abstract with minimal or no human revision
- AI-generated scientific ideas, claims, data, or conclusions
- For additional information, see the World Association of Medical Editor recommendations
- For your abstract submission, you will need to indicate the use of these tools.