MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056980395 · doi:10.1016/j.juro.2011.11.106

High Fidelity Simulation Based Team Training in Urology: A Preliminary Interdisciplinary Study of Technical and Nontechnical Skills in Laparoscopic Complications Management

2012· article· en· W2056980395 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Y. Lee, Phillip Mucksavage, Cecilia Canales, Elspeth M. McDougall, Sharon Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUrologyFidelityTraining (meteorology)Medical educationMedical physicsGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Simulation based team training provides an opportunity to develop interdisciplinary communication skills and address potential medical errors in a high fidelity, low stakes environment. We evaluated the implementation of a novel simulation based team training scenario and assessed the technical and nontechnical performance of urology and anesthesiology residents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Urology residents were randomly paired with anesthesiology residents to participate in a simulation based team training scenario involving the management of 2 scripted critical events during laparoscopic radical nephrectomy, including the vasovagal response to pneumoperitoneum and renal vein injury during hilar dissection. A novel kidney surgical model and a high fidelity mannequin simulator were used for the simulation. A debriefing session followed each simulation based team training scenario. Assessments of technical and nontechnical performance were made using task specific checklists and global rating scales. RESULTS: A total of 16 residents participated, of whom 94% rated the simulation based team training scenario as useful for communication skill training. Also, 88% of urology residents believed that the kidney surgical model was useful for technical skill training. Urology resident training level correlated with technical performance (p=0.004) and blood loss during renal vein injury management (p=0.022) but not with nontechnical performance. Anesthesia resident training level correlated with nontechnical performance (p=0.036). Urology residents consistently rated themselves higher on nontechnical performance than did faculty (p=0.033). Anesthesia residents did not differ in the self-assessment of nontechnical performance compared to faculty assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Residents rated the simulation based team training scenario as useful for interdisciplinary communication skill training. Urology resident training level correlated with technical performance but not with nontechnical performance. Urology residents consistently overestimated their nontechnical performance.

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)0.002
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 score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations58
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of UrologySame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207