ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2021
Implementation and evaluation of a novel subspecialty society fellows robotic surgical course: the SGO minimally invasive academy surgical curriculum.
Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical training in gynecological oncology using soft-embalmed human cadavers: first pilot study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Article
- Surgical training of gynecologic oncology fellows: Long-term trends and implications for future education.Gynecologic oncology · 2024Article
- Evaluating robotic surgical courses: structured training matters.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2021Article
- Credentialing and Patient Safety in Robotic Gynecologic Surgery: Changes over the Last Eight Years.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the utility of a society-based robotic surgery training program for fellows in gynecologic oncology.
methodsAll participants underwent a 2-day robotic surgery training course between 2015-2017. The course included interactive didactic sessions with video, dry labs, and robotic cadaver labs. The labs encompassed a wide range of subject matter including troubleshooting, instrument variation, radical hysterectomies, and lymph node dissections. Participants completed a pre- and post-course survey using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from "not confident" to "extremely confident" on various measures. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics v. 24.
resultsThe response rate was high with 86% of the 70 participants completing the survey. Sixteen (26.7%) of these individuals were attending physicians and 44 (73.3%) were fellows. In general, there was a significant increase in confidence in more complex procedures and concepts such as radical hysterectomy (p=0.01), lymph node dissection (p=0.01), troubleshooting (p=0.001), and managing complications (p=0.004). Faculty comfort and practice patterns were cited as the primary reason (58.9%) for limitations during robotic procedures followed secondarily by surgical resources (34.0%).
conclusionIn both gynecologic oncology fellows and attendings, this educational theory-based curriculum significantly improved confidence in the majority of procedures and concepts taught, emphasizing the value of hands-on skill labs.
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.