Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34370121›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022

Aptitude and attitude: predictors of performance during and after basic laparoscopic skills training.

Kirsty L Beattie, Andrew Hill, Mark S Horswill, Philip M Grove, Andrew R L Stevenson

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Kirsty L BeattieSchool of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. kirsty.beattie@uq.net.au.ORCID 0000-0003-2141-6235
Andrew HillSchool of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Mark S HorswillSchool of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Philip M GroveSchool of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Andrew R L StevensonSchool of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
The University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundManual dexterity and visual-spatial ability are considered key to the development of superior laparoscopic skills. Nevertheless, these abilities do not reliably explain all the variance found in the technical performance of surgical trainees. Consequently, we must look beyond these abilities to improve our understanding of laparoscopic skills and to better identify/develop surgical potential earlier on. PURPOSE: To assess the individual and collective impact of physical, cognitive, visual, and psychological variables on performance during and after basic simulation-based laparoscopic skills training.

methodThirty-four medical students (laparoscopic novices) completed a proficiency-based laparoscopic skills training program (using either a 2D or 3D viewing mode). This was followed by one testing session, a follow-up testing session with new (yet similar) tasks, and a series of physical, cognitive, visual, and psychological measures.

resultsThe statistical models that best predicted variance in training performance metrics included four variables: viewing mode (2D vs 3D), psychological flexibility, perceived task demands, and manual dexterity (bimanual). In subsequent testing, a model that included viewing mode and manual dexterity (assembly) best predicted performance on the pre-practiced tasks. However, for a highly novel, spatially complex laparoscopic task, performance was best predicted by a model that comprised viewing mode, visual-spatial ability, and perceived task demands. At follow-up, manual dexterity (assembly) alone was the best predictor of performance on new (yet similar) tasks.

conclusionBy focussing exclusively on physical/cognitive abilities, we may overlook other important predictors of surgical performance (e.g. psychological variables). The present findings suggest that laparoscopic performance may be more accurately explained through the combined effects of physical, cognitive, visual, and psychological variables. Further, the results suggest that the predictors may change with both task demands and the development of the trainee. This study highlights the key role of psychological skills in overcoming initial training challenges, with far-reaching implications for practice.

Indexed as

LaparoscopySimulation TrainingStudents, MedicalAptitudeClinical CompetenceHumansAbilityLaparoscopyPotentialPsychologySkillTraining

Identifiers

PMID34370121
PMCPMC8351236
OpenAlexW3190721704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.