MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The National Pediatric Surgery Simulation Program in France: A tool to develop resident training in pediatric surgery

2018· article· en· W2891817191 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Bréaud, Isabelle Talon, Laurent Fourcade, Guillaume Podevin, Julien Rod, G. Audry, B. Dohin, Jean‐François Lecompte, Ronny Bensaïd, Virginie Rampal, Georges Azzie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Surgery · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTrainerCurriculumLikert scaleMedical educationSession (web analytics)Pediatric surgeryFidelityPediatric SurgeonTraining (meteorology)SurgeryPsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: To implement resident curriculum in France based on theoretical teaching and bed side training, the national council known as the "Collège Hospitalier et Universitaire de Chirurgie Pédiatrique" examined the relevance and feasibility of systematically introducing simulation program in the pediatric surgery resident training. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A national simulation training program was developed and took place in a 2-day session organized in 7 simulation centers in France. The program included technical (laparoscopic/suturing technique on low-fidelity models) and nontechnical (6 scenarios for standardized consultation, and a team work scenario based on errors prevention in the operative room) skills. Evaluation of the program (Likert scale from 1 (bad) to 5 (excellent) and notation on 20 points) concerned trainees and trainers. RESULTS: 40 residents (95% of all pediatric surgery French residents) attended with a ratio of trainees/trainer of ½. The training objectives earned a score of 4.46/5. The pedagogical value of the seminar scored 4.7/5, teaching quality 17.95/20, and the overall seminar score was 17.35/20. CONCLUSION: This program, unique nationally, was assessed very favorably by the participating residents and by the involved trainers. To our knowledge, it represents the first mandatory national simulation training program included within a surgical training model. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric SurgerySame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207