SynthesisNeurosurgical review2022
Microsurgical suturing assessment scores: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Neurosurgical skills analysis by machine learning models: systematic review.Neurosurgical review · 2023Pooled it
- Electroencephalogram-based Objective Assessment of Surgical Expertise during Microvascular Anastomosis Training.Neurologia medico-chirurgica · 2026Observational
- Madison Objective Self-Assessment Tool: A Reliable and User-Friendly Approach for Objective Self-Assessment in Microvascular Anastomosis Training.Neurosurgery practice · 2025Article
- Education and training in microsurgery: a current global overview.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Review
- Analyzing Procedural Time and Its Relationship to Performance in Microsurgical Training: A Pilot Study.Cureus · 2025Article
- Modeling the Microsurgical Learning Curve Using a Poisson-Based Statistical Approach for Skill Assessment.Cureus · 2025Article
- Assisting in Microsurgery: Operative and Technical Considerations.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2023Article
- Letter to the editor: "Microsurgical suturing assessment scores: a systematic review".Neurosurgical review · 2022Article
- Structured evaluation of a comprehensive microsurgical training program.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several scoring scales for the assessment of microsurgical skills have been established and validated with the same basic parameters. The study aims to review the existing scales to highlight those parameters, which can be utilized uniformly across all neurosurgical training centers. An online search was conducted and all the surgical scores pertinent to microsurgical suturing were reviewed. The scales were compared to identify parameters, which were important for skill development and assessment in neurosurgical trainees. Seven assessment scales were identified which assessed the trainee's proficiency in microsurgical suturing. The objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) and Northwestern Objective Microanastomosis Assessment Tool (NOMAT) were identified as the most widely used and validated assessment scales. The newer scales University of Western Ontario microsurgical skills acquisition/assessment (UWOMSA) and structured assessment of microsurgery (SAMS) were notable for the division of the skills. The knot strength, suture separation, and suture intervals were the most important parameters in all scales. Each scale has its strength in the assessment of the microsurgical proficiency of neurosurgical trainees. However, a more uniform scale that can be applied as per the level of the neurosurgical trainee is necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34075509What 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.