MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014831582 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0230931

Motivation to access laparoscopic skills training: Results of a Canadian survey of obstetrics and gynecology residents

2020· article· en· W3014831582 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jocelyn Stairs, Bradley W. Bergey, Finlay Maguire, Stephanie Scott

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsObstetrics and gynaecologyContext (archaeology)MedicineCurriculumExpectancy theoryMedical educationLikert scaleFamily medicineNursingPsychologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Competency based medical education (CBME) requires novel approaches to surgical education. Significant investment has been made in laparoscopic simulation, which has been shown to foster skill development prior to patient encounters. However, research suggests variable voluntary use of these resources by residents, and little is known about the motivational factors that influence their utilization. The purpose of this study was to characterize factors that motivate residents to seek laparoscopic simulation experience outside of the formal curriculum. DESIGN: We developed a questionnaire grounded in Expectancy Value Theory, an established psychological theory of motivation, by adapting validated measures to fit the study context. We conducted a cross sectional survey of Canadian obstetrics and gynecology residents. SETTING: We invited residents enrolled in English-language obstetrics and gynecology training programs in Canada to participate. PARTICIPANTS: All residents engaged in clinical duties during Winter 2018 were invited to complete the questionnaire. Forty-four Obstetrics and Gynecology (Ob/Gyn) residents participated in the study. RESULTS: Residents reported limited use of simulation resources and identified multiple barriers including lack of time, access, and supervision. They expressed concern about development of bad habits during independent practice, and simulation use was positively correlated with perceived utility. Compared to junior residents, senior residents reported greater enjoyment of laparoscopic surgery, less emotional costs, and higher self-efficacy for learning laparoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Residents' perception of utility and barriers impede voluntary simulation use and overall use was limited. As programs undertake curricula redevelopment for CBME, mitigating barriers and improving perceived utility of laparoscopic simulation is vital to increase use and enhance skill development.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.104 · 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207