Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29654528›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018

Development and validation of surgical training tool: cystectomy assessment and surgical evaluation (CASE) for robot-assisted radical cystectomy for men.

Ahmed A Hussein, Kevin J Sexton, Paul R May, Maxwell V Meng, Abolfazl Hosseini, Daniel D Eun, Siamak Daneshmand, Bernard H Bochner, James O Peabody, Ronney Abaza and 3 more

Open access · greenAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

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 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Innovations in Urologic Surgical Training.Current urology reports · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
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

13 authors at 10 institutions in 4 countries.

Ahmed A HusseinDepartment of Urology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA.
Kevin J SextonDepartment of Urology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA.
Paul R MayDepartment of Urology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA.
Maxwell V MengUniversity of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Abolfazl HosseiniKarolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Daniel D EunTemple University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Siamak DaneshmandUniversity of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Bernard H BochnerMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
James O PeabodyHenry Ford Health Systems, Detroit, MI, USA.
Ronney AbazaOhioHealth, Dublin, OH, USA.
Eila C SkinnerStanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Richard E HautmannUniversity of Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Khurshid A GuruDepartment of Urology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA. Khurshid.Guru@roswellpark.org.
Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center · USHenry Ford Health System · USKarolinska University Hospital · SEMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USOhioHealth · USStanford University · USTemple University Hospital · USUniversität Ulm · DEUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Summer Research Experiences in Quantitative Cancer Sciences and Emerging TechnologiesR25CA181003 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI PAMELA A HERSHBERGER, Mukund Seshadri · 2014 to 2026
$3.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS R25 CA181003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe aimed to develop a structured scoring tool: cystectomy assessment and surgical evaluation (CASE) that objectively measures and quantifies performance during robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) for men.

methodsA multinational 10-surgeon expert panel collaborated towards development and validation of CASE. The critical steps of RARC in men were deconstructed into nine key domains, each assessed by five anchors. Content validation was done utilizing the Delphi methodology. Each anchor was assessed in terms of context, score concordance, and clarity. The content validity index (CVI) was calculated for each aspect. A CVI ≥ 0.75 represented consensus, and this statement was removed from the next round. This process was repeated until consensus was achieved for all statements. CASE was used to assess de-identified videos of RARC to determine reliability and construct validity. Linearly weighted percent agreement was used to assess inter-rater reliability (IRR). A logit model for odds ratio (OR) was used to assess construct validation.

resultsThe expert panel reached consensus on CASE after four rounds. The final eight domains of the CASE included: pelvic lymph node dissection, development of the peri-ureteral space, lateral pelvic space, anterior rectal space, control of the vascular pedicle, anterior vesical space, control of the dorsal venous complex, and apical dissection. IRR > 0.6 was achieved for all eight domains. Experts outperformed trainees across all domains.

conclusionWe developed and validated a reliable structured, procedure-specific tool for objective evaluation of surgical performance during RARC. CASE may help differentiate novice from expert performances.

Indexed as

ConsensusCystectomyEducation, Medical, GraduateHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsRobotic Surgical ProceduresSurgeonsUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAssessmentQualityRadical cystectomyRobot-assistedSkill acquisitionTraining

Identifiers

PMID29654528
PMCPMC6648669
OpenAlexW2797012353

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.