ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2021
Mind the Gap: a Competency-Based Scoping Review of Aesthetic and Reconstructive Reported Simulation Training Models.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSimulation training has become an integral part of plastic surgery postgraduate curricula. It facilitates the acquisition of skills in a safe environment that can be later transferred to real-life settings. A variety of models have been described covering some aspects of the specialty better than others. The aim of this study was to identify and classify all the previously reported plastic surgery simulation models and the possible gaps having the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) list of competencies as a guide.
methodsThrough a Delphi process, the complete list of ACGME minimum requirements for certification was analyzed to identify domains amenable for simulation training. A systematic search was conducted in Pubmed looking for all previously reported simulation models in plastic surgery. Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and parallel blind review were used to identify eligible models.
resultsA total of 81 ACGME competencies were identified. Following a 3-round Delphi process, consensus was reached on 19 reconstructive and 15 aesthetic surgery domains suitable for simulation training. 1667 articles were initially retrieved from Pubmed, of which 66 articles were eligible for inclusion. Descriptive (65%), quasi-experimental (24%) and experimental studies (11%) were found. For the 34 identified ACGME competencies, there were simulation models described for 58.8% of these, mostly covering reconstructive surgery (84.2%) while for aesthetic surgery it was 13.3%.
conclusionsThis scoping review has identified that there are still gaps in ACGME competencies that could benefit from new simulation training models, especially in those related to aesthetic surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
33483780What 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.