A scoping review of nontechnical skill assessment tools to evaluate trauma team performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this scoping review was to identify assessment tools of trauma team performance (outside of technical skills) and assess the validity and reliability of each tool in assessing trauma team performance. METHODS: We searched Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Ovid Medline, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from inception to June 1, 2021. English studies that evaluated trauma team performance using nontechnical skill assessment tools in a simulation or real-world setting were included. Studies were assessed by two independent reviewers for meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data regarding team assessment tools were extracted and synthesized into behavior domains. Each tool was then assessed for validity and reliability. RESULTS: The literature search returned 4,215 articles with 29 meeting inclusion criteria. Our search identified 12 trauma team performance assessment tools. Most studies were conducted in the United States (n = 20 [69%]). Twenty studies (69%) assessed trauma team performance in a simulation setting; Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) and Trauma Nontechnical Skills Scale (T-NOTECHS) were the only tools to be applied in a simulation and real-world setting. Most studies assessed trauma team performance using video review technology (n = 17 [59%]). Five overarching themes were designed to encompass behavioral domains captured across the 12 tools: (1) Leadership, (2) Communication, (3) Teamwork, (4) Assessment, and (5) Situation Awareness. The reliability and validity of T-NOTECHS were investigated by the greatest number of studies (n = 13); however, TEAM had the most robust evidence of reliability and validity. CONCLUSION: We identified 12 trauma team performance tools that assessed nontechnical skills to varying degrees. Trauma Nontechnical Skills Scale and TEAM tools had the most evidence to support their reliability and validity. Considering the limited research in the impact of trauma team performance on patient outcomes, future studies could use video review technology in authentic trauma cases to further study this important relationship. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses, 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".