ArticleAEM education and training2023
Development and content validation of the checklist for assessing placement of a small-bore chest tube (CAPS) for small-bore chest tube placement.
Article in AEM education and training, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chest Tubes and Pleural Drainage: History and Current Status in Pleural Disease Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Development and content validation of the checklist for assessing placement of a small-bore chest tube (CAPS) for small-bore chest tube placement.AEM education and training · 2023Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Small-bore chest tube (SBCT) placement via modified Seldinger technique is a commonly performed invasive procedure for treatment of pleural effusion and pneumothorax. When performed suboptimally, it may lead to serious complications. Validated checklists are central to teaching and assessing procedural skills and may result in improved health care quality. In this paper, we describe the development and content validation of a SBCT placement checklist. Methods: A literature review across multiple medical databases and seminal textbooks was performed to identify all publications describing procedural steps involved in SBCT placement. No studies were identified that involved systematic development of a checklist for this purpose. After the first iteration of a comprehensive checklist (CAPS) based on literature review was developed, the modified Delphi technique involving a panel of nine multidisciplinary experts was used to modify it and establish its content validity. Results: After four Delphi rounds, the mean expert-rated Likert score across all checklist items was 6.85 ± 0.68 (out of 7). The final, 31-item checklist had a high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.846) with 95% of the responses (by nine experts across 31 checklist items) being a numerical score of 6 or 7. Conclusions: This study reports the development and content validity of a comprehensive checklist for teaching and assessing SBCT placement. For purposes of demonstrating construct validity, this checklist should next be studied in the simulation and clinical setting.
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.