MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921565575 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.17.01512

Resident Surgical Skills Web-Based Evaluation

2019· article· en· W2921565575 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ann E. Van Heest, Julie Agel, Elizabeth Ames, Ferhan A. Asghar, John J. Harrast, J. Lawrence Marsh, Joshua C. Patt, Robert S. Sterling, Terrance D. Peabody

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSummative assessmentPhysical therapyCurriculumSurgeryMedical educationFormative assessmentPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of surgical skill competency is necessary as graduate medical education moves toward a competency-based curriculum. This study by the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) and the Council of Orthopaedic Residency Directors (CORD) compares 2 web-based evaluation tools that assess the level of autonomy that is demonstrated by residents during surgical procedures in the operating room as measured by faculty. METHODS: Two hundred and ninety-four residents from 16 orthopaedic surgery residency programs were evaluated by 370 faculty using 2 web-based evaluation tools in a crossover design in which residents requested faculty review of their surgical skills before starting a case. One thousand, one hundred and fifty Ottawa Surgical Competency Operating Room Evaluation (O-Score) assessments, which included a 9-question evaluation of 8 steps of the surgical procedure, were compared with 1,186 P-score evaluations, which included a single-question summative evaluation. Twenty-five different surgical procedures were evaluated. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in rates of resident requests or faculty completion of the 2 scores. The most common surgical procedures that were assessed were total knee arthroplasty (n = 254, 11%), carpal tunnel release (n = 191, 8%), open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of stable hip fractures (n = 170, 7%), ORIF of simple ankle fractures (n = 169, 7%), and total hip arthroplasty (n = 166, 7%). Both instruments disclosed significant differences in competency among entry, intermediate, and advanced-level residents. The findings support the construct validity of the evaluation method. The survey results indicated that >70% of the faculty were confident that use of either the P-score or the O-score allowed them to distinguish a resident who can perform the surgery independently from one who needs additional training. CONCLUSIONS: This research has led to the modification of the O-score and the P-score into a combined OP-score instrument. The ABOS envisions that the OP-score instrument can be used with an expanded number of surgical procedures as a required element of residency training in the near future. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study allows the profession of orthopaedic surgery education to take a leadership role in the measurement of competence for surgical skills for orthopaedic surgeons in residency training, an important clinically relevant topic to the practice of orthopaedic surgery.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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