Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38846775›Full record

ArticleSurgery open science2024

Reimagining general surgery resident selection: Collaborative innovation through design thinking.

Tejas S Sathe, Joseph C L'Huillier, Rebecca Moreci, Sarah Lund, Riley Brian, Caitlin Silvestri, Connie Gan, Colleen McDermott, Angie Atkinson, Sergio M Navarro and 6 more

Abstract read
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.

  1. 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

16 authors.

Tejas S SatheDepartment of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Joseph C L'HuillierDepartment of Surgery, University at Buffalo Jacobs School of Medicine, Buffalo, NY, United States of America.
Rebecca MoreciDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America.
Sarah LundDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
Riley BrianDepartment of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
Caitlin SilvestriDepartment of Surgery, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, United States of America.
Connie GanDepartment of Surgery, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States of America.
Colleen McDermottDepartment of Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
Angie AtkinsonDepartment of Surgery, University of Texas Health Sciences San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, United States of America.
Sergio M NavarroDepartment of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
Justine BroeckerDepartment of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States of America.
John M WoodwardDepartment of Surgery, University at Buffalo Jacobs School of Medicine, Buffalo, NY, United States of America.
Tawni JohnstonDepartment of Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
Nicholas LaconiDepartment of Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, United States of America.
Jonathan WilliamsDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States of America.
Steven ThorntonDepartment of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The process by which surgery residency programs select applicants is complex, opaque, and susceptible to bias. Despite attempts by program directors and educational researchers to address these issues, residents have limited ability to affect change within the process at present. Here, we present the results of a design thinking brainstorm to improve resident selection and propose this technique as a framework for surgical residents to creatively solve problems and generate actionable changes. Methods: Members of the Collaboration of Surgical Education Fellows (CoSEF) used the design thinking framework to brainstorm ways to improve the resident selection process. Members participated in one virtual focus group focused on identifying pain points and developing divergent solutions to those pain points. Pain points and solutions were subsequently organized into themes. Finally, members participated in a second virtual focus group to design prototypes to test the proposed solutions. Results: Sixteen CoSEF members participated in one or both focus groups. Participants identified twelve pain points and 57 potential solutions. Pain points and solutions were grouped into the three themes of transparency, fairness, and applicant experience. Members subsequently developed five prototype ideas that could be rapidly developed and tested to improve resident selection. Conclusions: The design thinking framework can help surgical residents come up with creative ideas to improve pain points within surgical training. Furthermore, this framework can supplement existing quantitative and qualitative methods within surgical education research. Future work will be needed to implement the prototypes devised during our sessions and turn them into complete interventions. Key message: In this paper, we demonstrate the results of a resident-led design thinking brainstorm on improving resident selection in which our team identified twelve pain points in resident selection, ideated 57 solutions, and developed five prototypes for further testing. In addition to sharing our results, we believe design thinking can be a useful framework for creative problem solving within surgical education.

Indexed as

Academic SurgeryCollaborationDesign thinkingResident selectionSurgical education

Identifiers

PMID38846775
PMCPMC11152970

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.