Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32725331›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2021

Consensus on technical procedures in radiology to include in simulation-based training for residents: a European-wide needs assessment.

Leizl Joy Nayahangan, Elisabeth Albrecht-Beste, Lars Konge, Boris Brkljačić, Carlo Catalano, Birgit Ertl-Wagner, Katrine Riklund, Michael Bachmann Nielsen

Abstract readConsensus Statement
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Leizl Joy NayahanganCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES) and The Capital Region of Denmark, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. leizl.joy.nayahangan@regionh.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6179-1622
Elisabeth Albrecht-BesteDepartment of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine and PET, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lars KongeCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES) and The Capital Region of Denmark, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Boris BrkljačićDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital "Dubrava", Zagreb, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia.
Carlo CatalanoDepartment of Radiological Sciences, University La Sapienza, Rome, Italy.
Birgit Ertl-WagnerInstitute of Clinical Radiology, University of Munich, Grosshadern Campus, Munich, Germany.
Katrine RiklundDepartment of Radiation Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Michael Bachmann NielsenFaculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
University of Copenhagen · DKCopenhagen University Hospital · DKLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DERigshospitalet · DKSapienza University of Rome · ITUmeå University · SEUniversity of Zagreb · HR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo identify and prioritize technical procedures for simulation-based training that should be part of the education of residents in radiology.

methodsThis European-wide needs assessment study used a modified Delphi technique to gather consensus from different key education stakeholders in the field. The first round was a brainstorming phase to identify all procedures that a newly specialized radiologist should potentially be able to do. In the second round, each procedure was explored for the need for simulation training; the participants determined frequency, number of radiologists performing the procedure, impact on patient comfort and safety, and feasibility of simulation. The result of this round was sent back to the participants for final evaluation and prioritization.

resultsSeventy-one key education stakeholders from 27 European countries agreed to participate and were actively involved in the Delphi process: response rates were 72% and 82% in the second and third round, respectively. From 831 suggested procedures in the first round, these were grouped and categorized into 34 procedures that were pre-prioritized in the second round according to the need for simulation-based training. In the third round, 8 procedures were eliminated resulting in final inclusion of 26 procedures. Ultrasound procedures were highly ranked including basic skills such as probe handling; abdominal ultrasound; and ultrasound of kidneys, retroperitoneum, intestines, and scrotum.

conclusionThe prioritized list of procedures represents a consensus document decided upon by educational stakeholders in radiology across Europe. These procedures are suitable for simulation and should be an integral part of the education of radiologists. KEY POINTS: • The 26 identified procedures are listed according to priority and should be included as an integral part of simulation-based training curricula of radiologists across Europe. • This needs assessment is only the first step towards developing standardized simulation-based training programs that support the harmonization of education and training across Europe.

Indexed as

RadiologySimulation TrainingClinical CompetenceCurriculumDelphi TechniqueEuropeHumansMaleNeeds AssessmentCurriculumDelphi techniqueNeeds assessmentRadiologySimulation training

Identifiers

PMID32725331
OpenAlexW3045676041

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.