ArticleSurgery open science2024
OSABSS: An authentic examination for assessing basic surgical skills in surgical residents.
Article in Surgery open science, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to develop and validate the OSABSS (Objective Structured Assessment of Basic Surgical Skills), a modified Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), to assess basic surgical skills in residents. Design: A developmental study conducted in two phases. Basic skills were identified through literature review and gap analysis. The OSABSS was then designed as a modified OSCE. Setting: This study took place at Alborz University of Medical Sciences in Iran. Interventions: The OSABSS was created using Harden's OSCE (Objective Structured Clinical Examination) methodology. Scenarios, checklists, and station configurations were developed through expert panels. The exam was piloted and implemented with residents as participants and faculty as evaluators. Participants: 32 surgical residents in gynecology, general surgery, orthopedics, and neurosurgery participated. 22 faculty members were evaluators. Primary and secondary outcome measures: The primary outcome was OSABSS exam scores. Secondary outcomes were written exam scores, and national residency entrance ranks. Main results: The mean OSABSS score was 16.59 ± 0.19 across all stations. Criterion validity was demonstrated through correlations between OSABSS scores, written scores and entrance ranks. Reliability was high, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.87. No significant inter-rater score differences were found. Conclusions: The rigorous OSABSS development process produced an exam demonstrating strong validity and reliability for assessing basic surgical skills. The comprehensive station variety evaluates diverse technical and non-technical competencies. Further research should expand participant samples across surgical disciplines.
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.