ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Development and evaluation of a societal core robotic surgery accreditation curriculum for the UK.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acclimatising with 3D virtual reality video improves simulator performance: initial findings of a randomised controlled feasibility trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Trial
- National multi-specialty robotic surgery training curriculum and implementation for UK surgical residents: a delphi consensus.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Preliminary validity evidence for a platform-specific assessment tool for robotic setup and docking.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Pre-Procedural Robotic Surgery Curricula: A Systematic Review and Thematic Meta-Synthesis.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Review
- Robotic Surgical Training in the Northern Deanery: A trainee-led evaluation in line with GIRFT recommendations.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Association of skill and errors with outcomes in robotic rectal cancer surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Live, proctored robotic training for the novice robotic surgeon: outcomes and educational value of the Portsmouth Robotic Essentials Course.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Standardising robotic system setup: an international expert consensus.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- The evolution of training in robotic colorectal surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Procedural robotic surgery training: a UK pan-specialty trainee Delphi consensus study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- A multi-perspective qualitative study on robotic-assisted surgery training demand.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A pan-European survey of robotic training for gastrointestinal surgery: European Robotic Surgery Consensus (ERSC) initiative.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Blended learning course for ultrasound-guided diagnostic skills: a design-based research study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Technical Skills Assessment in Robotic Surgery: A Review of Recent Methods.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Standardised proficiency-based progression is the cornerstone of safe robotic skills acquisition, however, is currently lacking within surgical training curricula. Expert consensuses have defined a modular pathway to accredit surgeons. This study aimed to address the lack of a formal, pre-clinical core robotic skills, proficiency-based accreditation curriculum in the UK. Novice robotic participants underwent a four-day pre-clinical core robotic skills curriculum incorporating multimodal assessment. Modifiable-Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (M-GEARS), VR-automated performance metrics (APMs) and Objective Clinical Human Reliability Analysis (OCHRA) error methodology assessed performance at the beginning and end of training. Messick's validity concept and a curriculum evaluation model were utilised. Feedback was collated. Proficiency-based progression, benchmarking, tool validity and reliability was assessed through comparative and correlational statistical methods. Forty-seven participants were recruited. Objective assessment of VR and dry models across M-GEARS, APMs and OCHRA demonstrated significant improvements in technical skill (p < 0.001). Concurrent validity between assessment tools demonstrated strong correlation in dry and VR tasks (r = 0.64-0.92, p < 0.001). OCHRA Inter-rater reliability was excellent (r = 0.93, p < 0.001 and 81% matched error events). A benchmark was established with M-GEARS and for the curriculum at 80%. Thirty (63.82%) participants passed. Feedback was 5/5 stars on average, with 100% recommendation. Curriculum evaluation fulfilled all five domains of Messick's validity. Core robotic surgical skills training can be objectively evaluated and benchmarked to provide accreditation in basic robotic skills. A strategy is necessary to enrol standardised curricula into national surgical training at an early stage to ensure patient safety.
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.