MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127575777 · doi:10.1111/medu.12786

Spatial abilities and technical skills performance in health care: a systematic review

2015· review· en· W2127575777 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité de SherbrookeCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycINFOCINAHLScopusMEDLINEPsychologyMedical educationConfidence intervalMeta-analysisSystematic reviewMedicinePsychiatryPsychological interventionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between spatial abilities and technical skills performance in health care in beginners and to compare this relationship with those in intermediate and autonomous learners. METHODS: Search criteria included 'spatial abilities' and 'technical skills'. Keywords related to these criteria were defined. A literature search was conducted to 20 December, 2013 in Scopus (including MEDLINE) and in several databases on EBSCOhost platforms (CINAHL Plus with Full Text, ERIC, Education Source and PsycINFO). Citations were obtained and reviewed by two independent reviewers. Articles related to retained citations were reviewed and a final list of eligible articles was determined. Articles were assessed for quality using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network-50 assessment instrument. Data were extracted from articles in a systematic way. Correlations between spatial abilities test scores and technical skills performance were identified. RESULTS: A series of 8289 citations was obtained. Eighty articles were retained and fully reviewed, yielding 36 eligible articles. The systematic review found a tendency for spatial abilities to be negatively correlated with the duration of technical skills and positively correlated with the quality of technical skills performance in beginners and intermediate learners. Pooled correlations of studies were -0.46 (p = 0.03) and -0.38 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.53 to -0.21) for duration and 0.33 (95% CI 0.20-0.44) and 0.41 (95% CI 0.26-0.54) for quality of technical skills performance in beginners and intermediate learners, respectively. However, correlations between spatial abilities test scores and technical skills performance were not statistically significant in autonomous learners. CONCLUSIONS: Spatial abilities are an important factor to consider in selecting and training individuals in technical skills in health care.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.375
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.337
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