ArticleHeliyon2023
Evaluation of a scoring system to assess proficiency in cerebral angiography for neuroendovascular surgery education.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-Time AI-Generated Guidewire-Out-of-View Notifications in Diagnostic Cerebral Angiography: Higher Observed Rates Among Trainees.Clinical neuroradiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Cerebral angiography is indispensable for endovascular neurosurgeons. However, there is no established system to evaluate the competency of trainees. We established a scoring system and statistically analyzed its characteristics. Methods: Endovascular neurosurgeons scored the operators of 177 cerebral angiography based on ten evaluation items. Preoperative explanation, device selection, and device assembly were classified as "preparation," communication with the patient, radiation protection and angiography system as "attention," and catheter operation, blood loss, procedure completion, and sheath insertion as "skill". The sum of the scores were compared using the Mann-Whitney test according to the status of the operator (trainee (TR), neurosurgeon (NS), or endovascular neurosurgeon (EVNS)). Results: The highest average for each item was 0.89 for communication, and the lowest was 0.68 for catheter operation. The mean ± standard deviation of the total score was 7.82 ± 2.02, and scores by status were 7.08 ± 2.12 for TR, 8.32 ± 1.35 for NS, and 9.33 ± 1.20 for EVNS with significant differences among each status (p < 0.05). The sum scores of the preparation, attention, and skill sections also showed significant differences between each status except between NS and EVNS in the preparation section and TR and NS in the skill section (p < 0.05). Conclusions: There were significant differences in the total score between statuses, suggesting that the scoring system may be an indicator of proficiency in cerebral angiography. It was suggested that dividing each item into preparation, attention, and skill sections may indicate the characteristics of proficiency.
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.