MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319593505 · doi:10.1097/prs.0b013e3181f95adb

A New, Validated Instrument to Evaluate Competency in Microsurgery: The University of Western Ontario Microsurgical Skills Acquisition/Assessment Instrument [Outcomes Article]

2011· article· en· W2319593505 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntraclass correlationKnot tyingInter-rater reliabilityMicrosurgeryRating scaleConstruct validityCorrelation coefficientPhysical therapyReliability (semiconductor)Scale (ratio)MedicinePsychologyStatisticsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychometricsSurgeryMathematicsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The authors present a model for microsurgery learning as well as a validated instrument to evaluate microsurgical competency. METHODS: Novice microsurgeons participated in three 3-hour sessions wherein they completed a number of increasingly complex, standardized microsurgical tasks. Performance was recorded and graded using a newly developed University of Western Ontario Microsurgery Skills Acquisition/Assessment (UWOMSA) instrument. The knot-tying and anastomosis modules contained three categories with five-point Likert scales. Each learner's performance was assessed by two blinded surgeons. Reznick's validated global rating scale for operative performance was utilized to establish criterion validity. Within-scale scores were compared via intraclass correlation and between-scale scores with Pearson correlation coefficient. Linear regression was used to evaluate the effect of various predictors on UWOMSA scores. RESULTS: Thirty-seven videos (9.6 hours) were reviewed, including 20 knot-tying sessions and 17 anastomoses. Interrater reliability of UWOMSA was high, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.75 (0.57, 0.87). The intraclass correlation of the global rating scale was 0.79 (0.62, 0.89). Intrarater reliability of the UWOMSA was also high, with an intraclass correlation of 0.69 (0.48, 0.83). The intraclass correlation of the global rating scale was 0.69 (0.47, 0.84). Measures of criterion validity demonstrated strong agreement between UWOMSA and the global rating scale (Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.96; p < 0.001). Measures of construct validity demonstrated that higher scores on the UWOMSA were associated with faster knot tying (p < 0.0001) and higher postgraduate year level (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The UWOMSA instrument performed well in terms of reliability and validity. Further study is planned to assess the instrument's ability to predict microsurgical skills translation to the clinical setting.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0040.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.231 · 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