ArticleThe Laryngoscope2024
Correcting for Rater Effects in Operating Room Surgical Skills Assessment.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical confidence and competence among US veterinary students after a high-volume sterilisation campaign in rural Mexico.Veterinary record open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo estimate and adjust for rater effects in operating room surgical skills assessment performed using a structured rating scale for nasal septoplasty.
methodsWe analyzed survey responses from attending surgeons (raters) who supervised residents and fellows (trainees) performing nasal septoplasty in a prospective cohort study. We fit a structural equation model with the rubric item scores regressed on a latent component of skill and then fit a second model including the rating surgeon as a random effect to model a rater-effects-adjusted latent surgical skill. We validated this model against conventional measures including the level of expertise and post-graduation year (PGY) commensurate with the trainee's performance, the actual PGY of the trainee, and whether the surgical goals were achieved.
resultsOur dataset included 188 assessments by 7 raters and 41 trainees. The model with one latent construct for surgical skill and the rater as a random effect was the best. Rubric scores depended on how severe or lenient the rater was, sometimes almost as much as they depended on trainee skill. Rater-adjusted latent skill scores increased with attending-estimated skill levels and PGY of trainees, increased with the actual PGY, and appeared constant over different levels of achievement of surgical goals.
conclusionOur work provides a method to obtain rater effect adjusted surgical skill assessments in the operating room using structured rating scales. Our method allows for the creation of standardized (i.e., rater-effects-adjusted) quantitative surgical skill benchmarks using national-level databases on trainee assessments. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A Laryngoscope, 134:3548-3554, 2024.
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.