Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31748927›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2020

Video-based coaching in surgical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Knut Magne Augestad, Khayam Butt, Dejan Ignjatovic, Deborah S Keller, Ravi Kiran

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Training and credentialing in robotic general surgery.International journal of colorectal disease · 2026
    Review
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Knut Magne AugestadDepartment of Postgraduate Surgical Education, University Hospital North Norway, Tromsö, Norway. knut.magne.augestad@unn.no.ORCID 0000-0002-4093-652X
Khayam ButtDepartment of GI Surgery, Nordlandssykehuset, Bodø, Norway.
Dejan IgnjatovicDepartment of GI Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Deborah S KellerDivision of Colorectal Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Ravi KiranDivision of Colorectal Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the era of competency-based surgical education, VBC has gained increased attention and may enhance the efficacy of surgical education. The objective of this systematic review was to summarize the existing evidence of video-based coaching (VBC) and compare VBC to traditional master-apprentice-based surgical education.

methodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) assessing VBC according to the PRISMA and Cochrane guidelines. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and COCHRANE and Researchgate databases were searched for eligible manuscripts. Standard mean difference (SMD) of performance scoring scales was used to assess the effect of VBC versus traditional training without VBC (control).

resultsOf 627 studies identified, 24 RCTs were eligible and evaluated. The studies included 778 surgical trainees (n = 386 VBC vs. n = 392 control). 13 performance scoring scales were used to assess technical competence; OSATS-GRS was the most common (n = 15). VBC was provided preoperative (n = 11), intraoperative (n = 1), postoperative (n = 10), and perioperative (n = 2). The majority of studies were unstructured, where identified coaching frameworks were PRACTICE (n = 1), GROW (n = 2) and Wisconsin Coaching Framework (n = 1). There was an effect on performance scoring scales in favor of VBC coaching (SMD 0.87, p < 0.001). In subgroup analyses, the residents had a larger relative effect (SMD 1.13; 0.61-1.65, p < 0.001) of VBC compared to medical students (SMD 0.43, 0.06-0.81, p < 0.001). The greatest source of potential bias was absence of blinding of the participants and personnel (n = 20).

conclusionVideo-based coaching increases technical performance of medical students and surgical residents. There exist significant study and intervention heterogeneity that warrants further exploration, showing the need to structure and standardize video-based coaching tools.

Indexed as

Video RecordingClinical CompetenceCompetency-Based EducationFemaleGeneral SurgeryHumansInternship and ResidencyMaleMentoringRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicGOALSOSATSSurgical educationSurgical trainingVideo-based coaching (VBC)

Identifiers

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.