ArticleBMC medical education2020
Ob/Gyn resident self-perceived preparedness for minimally invasive surgery.
Article in BMC medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adnexal mass referral patterns in Gynecologic Oncology.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2025Article
- Improving the Surgical Education Experience: 9-month Outcomes of an Education Time-Out Pilot Study.Journal of surgical education · 2024Article
- Article
- Identifying the areas of low self-reported confidence of internal medicine residents in geriatrics: a descriptive study of findings from a structured geriatrics skills assessment survey.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- Outcomes of vaginal and laparoscopic hysterectomy with concomitant pelvic reconstructive surgery.International urogynecology journal · 2022Article
- Post-Market Clinical Follow-Up Study of the LevaLap 1.0 during Laparoscopic Access.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVery little is known regarding the readiness of senior U.S. Ob/Gyn residents to perform minimally invasive surgery. This study aims to evaluate the self-perceived readiness of senior Ob/Gyn residents to perform complex minimally invasive gynecologic surgery as well as their perceptions of the minimally invasive gynecologic surgery subspecialty.
methodsWe performed a national survey study of 3rd and 4th year Ob/Gyn residents. A novel 58-item survey was developed and sent to residency program directors and coordinators with the request to forward the survey link along to their senior residents.
resultsWe received 158 survey responses with 84 (53.2%) responses coming from 4th year residents and 74 (46.8%) responses from 3rd year residents. Residents who train with graduates of a fellowship in minimally invasive gynecologic surgery felt significantly more prepared to perform minimally invasive surgery compared to residents without this exposure in their training. The majority of senior residents (71.5%) feel their residency training adequately prepared them to be a competent minimally invasive gynecologic surgeon. However, only 50% feel prepared to perform a laparoscopic hysterectomy on a uterus greater than 12 weeks size, 29% feel prepared to offer a vaginal hysterectomy on a uterus 12-week size or greater, 17% feel comfortable performing a laparoscopic myomectomy, and 12% feel prepared to offer a laparoscopic hysterectomy for a uterus above the umbilicus.
conclusionsThe majority of senior U.S. Ob/Gyn residents feel prepared to provide minimally invasive surgery for complex gynecologic cases. However, surgical confidence in specific procedures decreases when surgical complexity increases.
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.