ArticleBMC ophthalmology2018
Development of a new valid and reliable microsurgical skill assessment scale for ophthalmology residents.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiple metrics assessment method for a reliable evaluation of corneal suturing skills.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- An update on the novel approaches towards skills assessment of ophthalmology residents in the Indian scenario.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2022Review
- Development of a valid and reliable pterygium surgery assessment scale for ophthalmology residents.BMC medical education · 2021Article
- Resident Skills Assessment in Corneal Suturing: A Comprehensive Review of Currently Proposed Educational Programs and Evaluation Tools.Journal of academic ophthalmology (2017) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMore and more concerns have been arisen about the ability of new medical graduates to meet the demands of today's practice environment. In this study, we wanted to develop a valid, reliable and standardized assessment tool for evaluating the basic microsurgical skills of residents in a microsurgery laboratory, to get them well prepared before entering the surgical realm of ophthalmology.
methodsTwenty-three experts who have teaching experience reviewed the assessment scale. Constructive comments were incorporated to ensure face and content validity. Twenty-one attendings from different specialties then graded eight corneal rupture suturing videos with the scale to investigate interrater reliability. Fourteen of them graded the same videos 3 months later to investigate intrarater reliability (repeatability).
resultsA total of 280 assessment scales were completed. All the ICC values of interrater reliability were greater than 0.8 with 75% data greater than 0.9 (range 0.860-0.976). All the ICC values of intrarater reliability (repeatability) were also greater than 0.8 with 63% data greater than 0.9 (range 0.833-0.954).
conclusionsThe assessment scale we developed is valid and reliable. This tool could be useful to ensure that junior residents achieve a certain level of microsurgical technique in a laboratory environment before training in the operation room. Hopefully, this tool will provide a structured template for other residency programs to assess their residents for basic microsurgical skills.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.