Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32857160›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2020

Assessment of Autonomy in Operative Procedures Among Female and Male New Zealand General Surgery Trainees.

Daniel B Joh, Bert van der Werf, Bridget J Watson, Rowan French, Simon Bann, Elizabeth Dennet, Benjamin P T Loveday

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Editorial: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Hernia Surgery.Journal of abdominal wall surgery : JAWS · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Advancing Urology Resident Surgical Autonomy.Current urology reports · 2023
    Review
  10. Resident Operative Autonomy and Attending Verbal Feedback Differ by Resident and Attending Gender.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Daniel B JohDepartment of Surgery, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Bert van der WerfDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Bridget J WatsonDepartment of Surgery, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand.
Rowan FrenchDepartment of Surgery, Waikato District Health Board, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Simon BannDepartment of Surgery, Capital and Coast District Health Board, Wellington, New Zealand.
Elizabeth DennetDepartment of Surgery, Capital and Coast District Health Board, Wellington, New Zealand.
Benjamin P T LovedayDepartment of Surgery, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The need for trainee sex equality within surgical training has resulted in an appraisal of the training experience in the New Zealand general surgery training program. Objective: To investigate the association between trainee sex and surgical autonomy in the operating room in the New Zealand general surgery training program. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study conducted from December 10, 2012, to December 10, 2017, examining all endoscopic, major, and minor procedures performed by all New Zealand general surgery trainees in every training hospital in New Zealand. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the level of meaningful autonomy by each New Zealand general surgery trainee (ie, trainee as primary operator without the surgeon mentor scrubbed for the case). Outcomes were compared using multivariable analysis. Results: This study included 120 New Zealand general surgery trainees (42 women [35%] and 78 men [65%]) who were analyzed over 279.5 trainee-years (88.5 trainee-years for women and 191.0 trainee-years for men). Included were 119 380 general surgery procedures (17 465 endoscopic, 56 964 major, and 44 951 minor) in 18 hospitals. By the end of the 5-year training program, female trainees had a lower cumulative mean autonomous caseload than male trainees for endoscopic (284.0 [95% CI, 207.0-361.0] vs 352.2 [95% CI, 282.9-421.6], P = .03), major (139.9 [95% CI, 76.7-203.2] vs 198.1 [95% CI, 142.3-254.0], P = .02), and minor (456.3 [95% CI, 394.8-517.9] vs 519.9 [95% CI, 465.6-574.2], P = .007) procedures. Conclusions and Relevance: After accounting for differences among trainees, hospital type, number of female and male surgeon mentors at each hospital, and trainee seniority, female trainees performed fewer cases with meaningful autonomy compared with male trainees. These findings support the need for pragmatic solutions to address this bias and further investigations on mechanisms contributing to discrepancies.

Indexed as

Gender EquityInternship and ResidencyProfessional AutonomyAdultCohort StudiesFemaleGeneral SurgeryHumansMaleNew Zealand

Identifiers

PMID32857160
PMCPMC7450402

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.