A scoping review of successful strategies for passing the American Board of Surgery certifying examination.

Matthew D Cahn, Ace St John, Stephen M Kavic

Abstract readScoping Review

In one paragraph

Article in Surgery open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

1citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

Navigating the American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) Success: Insights From Pre-assessment Practices in Preparing Surgical Residents for Competitive Sub-specialties.Cureus · 2024
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

3 authors.

Matthew D CahnUniversity of Maryland Medical Center, 22 South Greene St., Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.

Ace St JohnUniversity of Maryland Medical Center, 22 South Greene St., Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.

Stephen M KavicUniversity of Maryland School of Medicine, 655 West Baltimore St., Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This scoping review identifies existing literature that investigates what factors contribute to success on the American Board of Surgery (ABS) Certifying Exam (CE) to provide practical, evidence-based recommendations. Methods: A Pubmed search was completed utilizing the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis extension for scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) method. Results: Of 4368 articles identified, 45 articles met criteria for review. Manuscripts were placed into one of five categories: predictors from medical school, program interventions, modifiable candidate factors, the effect of mock oral exams, and those factors shown not to provide benefit for CE preparation. Conclusions: A variety of factors have either been shown to provide benefit for or be predictive of CE performance. Acknowledgement of these factors can provide benefit to both surgery residents as well as surgery programs. Despite these findings, research into these factors is generally of low quality, prompting the need for ongoing, high-quality investigations.

Indexed as

American Board of SurgeryBoard certificationCertifying examinationResidency

Identifiers

PMID38274238

DOI10.1016/j.sopen.2023.12.013

PMCPMC10809070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY-NC-ND

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.