ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018
A novel assessment tool for evaluating competence in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery lobectomy.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Video-based tools for surgical quality assessment of technical skills in laparoscopic procedures: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Review
- Article
- Objective improvement in dexterity for trainees undergoing a video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery simulation program, a prospective single center study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- Simulation-based VATS resection of the five lung lobes: a technical skills test.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Naples Prognostic Score as a novel prognostic prediction tool in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for early-stage lung cancer: a propensity score matching study.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Evaluation of competence in ultrasound-guided procedures-a generic assessment tool developed through the Delphi method.European radiology · 2021Article
- Structured and evidence-based training of technical skills in respiratory medicine and thoracic surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2021Review
- Crisis of confidence in cardiothoracic trainees: National trends in the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy.JTCVS open · 2021Article
- Auditorium of the future: e learning platform.Journal of thoracic disease · 2021Review
- Quality assessment of robot assisted thoracic surgical resection of non-small cell lung cancer: nodal upstaging and mediastinal recurrence.Journal of thoracic disease · 2021Article
- Methodology and timing of standardization.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
- Evaluating competency in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy performance using a novel assessment tool and virtual reality simulation.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Article
- NextGen training assessment tools in thoracic surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018Article
- Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy: a matter of competence.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018Article
- Competency Assessment for Mediastinal Mass Resection and Thymectomy: Design and Delphi Review Process.Journal of surgical educationArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpecific assessment tools can accelerate trainees' learning through structured feedback and ensure that trainees attain the knowledge and skills required to practice as competent, independent surgeons (competency-based surgical education). The objective was to develop an assessment tool for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy by achieving consensus within an international group of VATS experts.
methodThe Delphi method was used as a structured process for collecting and distilling knowledge from a group of internationally recognized VATS experts. Opinions were obtained in an iterative process involving answering repeated rounds of questionnaires. Responses to one round were summarized and integrated into the next round of questionnaires until consensus was reached.
resultsThirty-one VATS experts were included and four Delphi rounds were conducted. The response rate for each round were 68.9% (31/45), 100% (31/31), 96.8% (30/31), and 93.3% (28/30) for the final round where consensus was reached. The first Delphi round contained 44 items and the final VATS lobectomy Assessment Tool (VATSAT) comprised eight items with rating anchors: (1) localization of tumor and other pathological tissue, (2) dissection of the hilum and veins, (3) dissection of the arteries, (4) dissection of the bronchus, (5) dissection of lymph nodes, (6) retrieval of lobe in bag, (7) respect for tissue and structures, and (8) technical skills in general.
conclusionA novel and dedicated assessment tool for VATS lobectomy was developed based on VATS experts' consensus. The VATSAT can support the learning of VATS lobectomy by providing structured feedback and help supervisors make the important decision of when trainees have acquired VATS lobectomy competencies for independent performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29603007What 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.