SynthesisColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2024
Training and assessment for colorectal surgery and appendicectomy- a systematic review.
Synthesis in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Learning curve of minimally invasive complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Pooled it
- Training and assessment for colorectal surgery and appendicectomy- a systematic review.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024Pooled it
- Colorectal surgery simulation in realistic models: experience of Brazilian residents.Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery · 2026Article
- Development of a simulation-based laparoscopic ventral rectopexy module: skills training for minimally invasive pelvic surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Design and validation of a simulation-based training module for ileo-transverse intracorporeal anastomosis.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Internal and external factors affecting the performance score of surgical trainees doing laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective, observational cohort study in a structured training programme.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Observational
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimThere is currently an increased focus on competency-based training, in which training and assessment play a crucial role. The aim of this systematic review is to create an overview of hands-on training methods and assessment tools for appendicectomy and colon and rectal surgery procedures using either an open, laparoscopic or robot-assisted approach.
methodA systematic review of Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Scopus databases was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. We conducted the last search on 9 March 2023. All published papers describing hands-on training, evaluation of performance data and development of assessment tools were eligible. The quality of studies and the validity evidence of assessment tools are reported.
resultsFifty-one studies were identified. Laparoscopic assessment tools are abundant, but the literature still lacks good-quality assessment tools for open appendicectomy, robotic colectomy and open rectal surgery. Overall, there is a lack of discussion regarding the establishment of pass/fail standards and the consequences of assessment. Virtual reality simulation is used more for appendicectomy than colorectal procedures. Only a few of the studies investigating training were of acceptable quality. There is a need for high-quality studies in open and robotic-assisted colon surgery and all approaches to rectal surgery.
conclusionThis review provides an overview of current training methods and assessment tools and identifies where more research is needed based on the quality of the studies and the current validity evidence.
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.