Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32519273›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020

The Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery (FES) skills test: factors associated with first-attempt scores and pass rate.

Matthew Lineberry, Yoon Soo Park, Sara A Hennessy, E Matthew Ritter

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Surgical device design: do instruments fit today's surgeons?BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Matthew LineberryZamierowski Institute for Experiential Learning & Department of Population Health, University of Kansas Medical Center and Health System, Kansas City, KS, USA. mlineberry@kumc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-0177-5305
Yoon Soo ParkDepartment of Medical Education, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Sara A HennessyDepartment of Surgery, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
E Matthew RitterDivision of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Uniformed Services University/Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Southwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of Illinois Chicago · USUniversity of Kansas Medical Center · USWalter Reed National Military Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery (FES) program became required for American Board of Surgery certification as part of the Flexible Endoscopy Curriculum (FEC) for residents graduating in 2018. This study expands prior psychometric investigation of the FES skills test.

methodsWe analyzed de-identified first-attempt skills test scores and self-reported demographic characteristics of 2023 general surgery residents who were required to pass FES.

resultsThe overall pass rate was 83%. "Loop Reduction" was the most difficult sub-task. Subtasks related to one another only modestly (Spearman's ρ ranging from 0.11 to 0.42; coefficient α = .55). Both upper and lower endoscopic procedural experience had modest positive association with scores (ρ = 0.14 and 0.15) and passing. Examinees who tested on the GI Mentor Express simulator had lower total scores and a lower pass rate than those tested on the GI Mentor II (pass rates = 73% vs. 85%). Removing an Express-specific scoring rule that had been applied eliminated these differences. Gender, glove size, and height were closely related. Women scored lower than men (408- vs. 489-point averages) and had a lower first-attempt pass rate (71% vs. 92%). Glove size correlated positively with score (ρ = 0.31) and pass rate. Finally, height correlated positively with score (r = 0.27) and pass rate. Statistically controlling for glove size and height did not eliminate gender differences, with men still having 3.2 times greater odds of passing.

conclusionsFES skills test scores show both consistencies with the assessment's validity argument and several remarkable findings. Subtasks reflect distinct skills, so passing standards should perhaps be set for each subtask. The Express simulator-specific scoring penalty should be removed. Differences seen by gender are concerning. We argue those differences do not reflect measurement bias, but rather highlight equity concerns in surgical technology, training, and practice.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceEndoscopyEducational MeasurementEducational StatusFemaleHumansMaleAssessmentGenderPsychomotorSimulationSurgeryValidity

Identifiers

PMID32519273
OpenAlexW3033535766

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.