Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26664733›Full record

ArticleJRSM open2015

Lessons from surgery and anaesthesia: evaluation of non-technical skills in interventional radiology.

Chun L Pang, Salil B Patel, Nicola Pilkington

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JRSM open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Chun L PangPeninsula Radiology Academy, Plymouth NHS Hospitals Trust, Plymouth, UK.
Salil B PatelPeninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK.
Nicola PilkingtonDepartment of Anaesthesia, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the medical profession, surgery and anaesthesia are leading the way in identifying human errors that negatively affect patient safety. Evidence suggests that the implementation of non-technical skills assessments reduces such errors. Interventional Radiology is a procedural based speciality and therefore may also benefit from formal assessment of non-technical skills. This literature review supports the use of standardised assessment tools used in surgery and anaesthesia. Using the Downing framework of internal validity, the tools demonstrated good internal consistency but a spectrum of inter-rater variability, which can be partially improved with training. At present, a formal Interventional Radiology non-technical skills assessment tool is probably not suitable to be a stand-alone 'high stakes' assessment, but may be a useful adjunct to the existing array of workplace-based assessments.

Indexed as

anaesthesiaradiology (diagnostics)surgery

Identifiers

PMID26664733
PMCPMC4668915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.