MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009785202 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2012.07.010

Validation of a Global Assessment of Arthroscopic Skills in a Cadaveric Knee Model

2012· article· en· W2009785202 on OpenAlexafffund
Jesse Alan Slade Shantz, Jeff Leiter, John B. Collins, Peter B. MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of ManitobaPan Am Clinic
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaArthroscopy Association of North America
KeywordsCronbach's alphaArthroscopyIntraclass correlationMedicinePhysical therapyChecklistCadaveric spasmTest (biology)Reliability (semiconductor)Knee arthroscopyMedical physicsPsychologySurgeryPsychometricsClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether a global assessment of arthroscopic skills was valid for blinded assessment of cadaveric diagnostic knee arthroscopy. METHODS: A global skills assessment for arthroscopy was created using a published theory of the development of expertise. Faculty surgeons, fellows, and residents were consented and enrolled in this institutional review board-approved validation study. All participants were oriented to the equipment and procedures for diagnostic arthroscopy of the knee. After reviewing the anatomic structures to be visualized, participants were allowed 10 minutes to complete a diagnostic arthroscopy of the knee. The hands and arthroscopic view were recorded during this attempt. Resident participants completed a second filmed diagnostic arthroscopy 1 week after the initial attempt. Five blinded reviewers watched the synchronized videos and assessed arthroscopic skills with a procedure-specific checklist and the newly developed global skills assessment. The agreement between reviewers was determined by intraclass correlation coefficient. Internal consistency was determined with Cronbach's α. Test-retest reliability was measured by correlating repeated arthroscopies by residents. The ability of the global assessment to discriminate skill levels was determined with between-group Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: The agreement between global assessment scores was strong (I.C.C. = 0.80, 95% C.I. 0.68-0.92). The internal consistency of evaluations was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.97), and the test-retest reliability was strong (r = 0.52). The global assessment score was shown to be able to discriminate between skill levels by an analysis of variance indicating the difference in means among the various levels of training (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The Objective Assessment of Arthroscopic Skills is a useful adjunct to arthroscopic educators and learners and could be used for in-training evaluations. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The Objective Assessment of Arthroscopic Skills is an instrument that can be employed to measure the impact of skills curricula, including but not limited to simulation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgerySame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207