ArticleDEN open2024
The synergistic role of virtual coaching with simulation-based mastery learning for upper endoscopy.
Article in DEN open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Our simulation-based mastery learning (SBML) curriculum, delivered in person, has been shown to successfully train novices in structured esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). SBML with virtual coaching (VC) has the potential to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of endoscopy training and expand access to trainees from around the world. We share our observations conducting an EGD training course using SBML with VC. Methods: We conducted a 1-week virtual SBML course for novice trainees across seven academic centers in the USA and Asia. The cognitive component was delivered using an online learning platform. For technical skills, a virtual coach supervised hands-on training and local coaches provided assistance when needed. At the end of training, an independent rater assessed simulation-based performance using a validated assessment tool. We assessed the clinical performance of 30 EGDs using the ASGE Assessment of Competency in Endoscopy tool. We compared the trainees' scores to our cohort trained using in-person SBML training using non-inferiority t-tests. Results: We enrolled 21 novice trainees (mean age: 30.8 ± 3.6 years; female: 52%). For tip deflection, the trainees reached the minimum passing standard after 31 ± 29 runs and mastery after 52 ± 37 runs. For structured EGD, the average score for the overall exam was 4.6 ± 0.6, similar to the in-person cohort (4.7 ± 0.5, Conclusions: VC appears feasible and effective for training novice gastroenterology trainees. VC allowed us to scale our SBML course, expand access to experts, and administer SBML simultaneously across different sites at the highest standards.
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.