MP12-05 PERCEPTIONS AND ATTITUDES OF LEARNERS TOWARDS VIDEO RECORDING OF THEIR OPERATIVE PERFORMANCE FOR ASSESSMENT OF SURGICAL SKILLS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
You have accessJournal of UrologyEducation Research II (MP12)1 Sep 2021MP12-05 PERCEPTIONS AND ATTITUDES OF LEARNERS TOWARDS VIDEO RECORDING OF THEIR OPERATIVE PERFORMANCE FOR ASSESSMENT OF SURGICAL SKILLS Bruce Li, Yuding Wang, Omar Al-Jarallah, Jennifer Hoogenes, and Edward D. Matsumoto Bruce LiBruce Li More articles by this author , Yuding WangYuding Wang More articles by this author , Omar Al-JarallahOmar Al-Jarallah More articles by this author , Jennifer HoogenesJennifer Hoogenes More articles by this author , and Edward D. MatsumotoEdward D. Matsumoto More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001985.05AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: With the advancement of competency-based education, there has been increasing interest in video data collection in the operating room (OR) as a means for objective surgical skill assessment. However, studies evaluating feasibility of this new assessment method have had limited focus on the learner side. Our objective was to survey surgical trainees on their perceptions to videotaped surgical performance and its use in education and assessment. METHODS: A previously piloted online survey was distributed to all Canadian surgical program administrative staff and program directors with the request to be internally distributed to residents. All participants were anonymous. The survey was administrated over a 4-week time frame. RESULTS: A total of 138 of 548 responses were received (23.7% response rate). All surgical specialties and years of training were represented. 89% had no experience having their own operative skills recorded, while 66% reported the use of online surgical video recordings for surgical preparation. Most trainees (92%) were receptive to having their operative skills recorded for assessment, stating recordings would depict a true representation and be more objective than current methods. 95% felt that videotaping one’s operative performance could play a role in their learning; yet 52% indicated these should not be part of summative evaluation. A total of 66% expressed levels of concern with litigation issues, while 70% were not concerned with personal privacy. Trainees expressed that video recording in the OR would not be intrusive (55%), nor would it affect the “true” OR environment (56%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of surgical trainees were receptive to having their surgical skills recorded in the OR for educational purposes and felt that recordings would serve as an objective representation of surgical skills. Provided patient and trainee consent, surgical residency programs are encouraged to incorporate and increase accessibility of operative video recording of its residents. Source of Funding: No funding was received for the research conducted © 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 206Issue Supplement 3September 2021Page: e189-e190 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2021 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Bruce Li More articles by this author Yuding Wang More articles by this author Omar Al-Jarallah More articles by this author Jennifer Hoogenes More articles by this author Edward D. Matsumoto More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Loading ...
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.107 | 0.012 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".