Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32909062›Full record

ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2021

Content validity evidence for a simulation-based test of handheld otoscopy skills.

Josefine Hastrup von Buchwald, Martin Frendø, Mads J Guldager, Jacob Melchiors, Steven Arild Wuyts Andersen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2021. 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
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Face, Content, and Construct Validity of a Virtual Reality Otoscopy Simulator and Applicability to Medical Training.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Josefine Hastrup von BuchwaldDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. Fine_buch@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6977-3368
Martin FrendøDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Mads J GuldagerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Jacob MelchiorsDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Steven Arild Wuyts AndersenDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Rigshospitalet, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Rigshospitalet · DKNationwide Children's Hospital · US

Funding

Danmarks Frie Forskningsfond (DK) 8026-00003B
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAt graduation from medical school, competency in otoscopy is often insufficient. Simulation-based training can be used to improve technical skills, but the suitability of the training model and assessment must be supported by validity evidence. The purpose of this study was to collect content validity evidence for a simulation-based test of handheld otoscopy skills.

methodsFirst, a three-round Delphi study was conducted with a panel of nine clinical teachers in otorhinolaryngology (ORL) to determine the content requirements in our educational context. Next, the authenticity of relevant cases in a commercially available technology-enhanced simulator (Earsi, VR Magic, Germany) was evaluated by specialists in ORL. Finally, an integrated course was developed for the simulator based on these results.

resultsThe Delphi study resulted in nine essential diagnoses of normal variations and pathologies that all junior doctors should be able to diagnose with a handheld otoscope. Twelve out of 15 tested simulator cases were correctly recognized by at least one ORL specialist. Fifteen cases from the simulator case library matched the essential diagnoses determined by the Delphi study and were integrated into the course.

conclusionContent validity evidence for a simulation-based test of handheld otoscopy skills was collected. This informed a simulation-based course that can be used for undergraduate training. The course needs to be further investigated in relation to other aspects of validity and for future self-directed training.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceSimulation TrainingComputer SimulationGermanyHumansOtoscopyEvidence-based medical educationHandheld otoscopyOtologySimulation-based trainingTechnical skills training

Identifiers

PMID32909062
OpenAlexW3086472425

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.