Surgical Simulation Training for Medical Students: Strategies and Implications in Botswana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of simulation in teaching technical skills to medical students is not yet well defined. Strategies for its use may be especially relevant where teachers, time, and resources are limited, especially in low-middle-income countries. METHODS: Sixty-seven third-year and 67 fifth-year medical students at the University of Botswana were taught surgical skills by a trained peer medical student, a medical officer with no specialty training or a staff surgeon. Pre- and post-intervention performance of two basic tasks (simple interrupted suture (SIS) and laparoscopic peg transfer (LPT)) and one complex task (laparoscopic intracorporeal suture (LIS)) were assessed. Subjective measures of self-perceived performance, preparedness for internship, and interest in surgery were also measured. RESULTS: The simulation program decreased the time to complete the two basic tasks and improved the objective score for the complex task. Performance of the basic skills improved regardless of the seniority of the instructor while performance of the advanced skill improved more when taught by a staff surgeon. All students had similar improvements in their self-reported confidence to perform the skills, preparedness to assist in an operation and preparedness for internship, regardless of the seniority of their instructor. Students taught by a staff surgeon felt better prepared to assist in laparoscopic procedures. CONCLUSION: Simulation-based teaching of defined surgical skills can be effectively conducted by peers and near-peers. The implications are widespread and may be most relevant where time and resources are limited, and where experienced teachers are scarce.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".