Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29854135›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2017

Improving Common Ground Development in Surgical Training through Talk and Action.

Yuanyuan Feng, Helena M Mentis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Yuanyuan FengUniversity of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Helena M MentisUniversity of Maryland Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In surgical training, senior surgeons and residents rely on more than just verbal utterances to share information and coordinate their work practices - their actions also contribute to and shape the development of common ground. However, the function of actions in the grounding process and how that is interdependent with verbal utterances have not been made explicit. We have investigated actions and utterances using a dialogue act coding scheme that highlights the communicative functions of each act towards common ground development during a laparoscopic surgery. We show that utterances provide detailed information for surgeons to develop content common ground, whereas actions contribute to process common ground development. Thus, utterances and actions, by providing different forms of information, depend on each other to develop and maintain common ground. Based on this understanding, we discuss opportunities in transforming actions into perceivable knowledge on the laparoscopic display that supports effective communication and surgical training.

Indexed as

CommunicationComprehensionGeneral SurgeryHumansInterprofessional RelationsLaparoscopyOperating Rooms

Identifiers

PMID29854135
PMCPMC5977723

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.