ArticleBMC medical education2023
A study of validity and usability evidence for non-technical skills assessment tools in simulated adult resuscitation scenarios.
Article in BMC medical education, 2023. 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effectiveness and perceived value of feedback used in cardiac arrest simulation education: a mixed-method systematic review.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Influence of sociodemographic factors on expert-rated non-technical skills in trauma team simulations.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Nontechnical Skills (NTS) and the Quality of Conducting Prehospital Advanced Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Among Paramedics.Emergency medicine international · 2026Article
- Integrating non-technical skills into undergraduate medical simulation: a scoping review and thematic analysis of current practices.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2025Article
- Developing a learning tool for advanced life support and resuscitation: Performance Reflection Model for Resuscitation (PRM-Resus).BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Development of simulation scenarios for surgeons' non-technical skills evaluation.Global surgical education : journal of the Association for Surgical Education · 2025Article
- Curriculum Innovation: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of an Interdisciplinary Teamwork-Focused Neurocritical Care In Situ Simulation Training Program.Neurology. Education · 2024Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-technical skills (NTS) assessment tools are widely used to provide formative and summative assessment for healthcare professionals and there are now many of them. This study has examined three different tools designed for similar settings and gathered evidence to test their validity and usability.
methodsThree NTS assessment tools designed for use in the UK were used by three experienced faculty to review standardized videos of simulated cardiac arrest scenarios: ANTS (Anesthetists' Non-Technical Skills), Oxford NOTECHS (Oxford NOn-TECHnical Skills) and OSCAR (Observational Skill based Clinical Assessment tool for Resuscitation). Internal consistency, interrater reliability and quantitative and qualitative analysis of usability were analyzed for each tool.
resultsInternal consistency and interrater reliability (IRR) varied considerably for the three tools across NTS categories and elements. Intraclass correlation scores of three expert raters ranged from poor (task management in ANTS [0.26] and situation awareness (SA) in Oxford NOTECHS [0.34]) to very good (problem solving in Oxford NOTECHS [0.81] and cooperation [0.84] and SA [0.87] in OSCAR). Furthermore, different statistical tests of IRR produced different results for each tool. Quantitative and qualitative examination of usability also revealed challenges in using each tool.
conclusionsThe lack of standardization of NTS assessment tools and training in their use is unhelpful for healthcare educators and students. Educators require ongoing support in the use of NTS assessment tools for the evaluation of individual healthcare professionals or healthcare teams. Summative or high-stakes examinations using NTS assessment tools should be undertaken with at least two assessors to provide consensus scoring. In light of the renewed focus on simulation as an educational tool to support and enhance training recovery in the aftermath of COVID-19, it is even more important that assessment of these vital skills is standardized, simplified and supported with adequate training.
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.