The current status of simulation training and certification for thoracic surgery in Europe: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The past two decades have seen increasingly rapid advances in new surgical techniques and procedures in thoracic surgery. One of the greatest challenges is to educate and train thoracic surgeons in a safe and patient-free environment. The content of surgical training and education differs significantly among European countries. A common European training and certification structure might provide better opportunities to educate competent thoracic surgeons in the future. The objective of this article is to summarize the current state of educational programs and certification within thoracic surgery in Europe. Methods: A comprehensive search of the literature was performed, using PubMed Database, Medline, Cochrane and Google Scholar from May 2000 until June 2023, focusing on thoracic surgery education and training, thoracic surgery education and certification in Europe, certification, and training of general thoracic surgeons in Europe, and Canadian and American training and certification in thoracic surgery. Results: A total of 560 articles were retrieved from PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, and Cochrane. After removing the duplicates, 365 articles were scanned based on their title and abstract. Three hundred and twelve articles did not meet the inclusion criteria for this study. Fifty-three full text articles were assessed for eligibility and a total of 25 articles were selected for this study. In addition, we must accept the adopt advances in thoracic surgery and evolve the modern training program in thoracic surgery. There is a need for revision and refining of thoracic surgeon’s curricula across Europe. By harmonizing the training programs and certification in Thoracic Surgery across Europe, we provide competent thoracic surgeons with an equalized and better patient outcome. Conclusions: There is a need for a structured and evidence-based surgical curriculum, which includes simulation training to provide competent surgeons in Europe. Certification and examination boards with hands-on courses may ensure the quality of knowledge and help trainees gain basic and advanced surgical skills.
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 | 0.013 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".