Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2025
Fundamentals of leadership development: a randomized pilot study to evaluate implementation of a leadership curriculum for diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. 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.
- The compass project: comprehensive overview of European perceptions of non-technical skills in surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Fundamentals of Leadership Development (FLD) Curriculum was created to increase integration of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in leadership skills. The pilot FLD course was utilized 1) evaluate short-term impact of the curriculum, and 2) evaluate optimal delivery methods of curricular interventions on diversity in a leadership context in a randomized fashion.
methodsAfter IRB approval, the pilot FLD course was opened to all SAGES Committee members for enrollment. All participants had access to the same online modules and discussion forum, but were randomized either to a 4-week longitudinal or 2-day intensive didactic session. Participants were asked to assess the curricular content after each online module and provide overall course feedback on all sessions. This data was collected along with leadership experience, course participation, and course completion data.
resultsA total of 79 participants registered for the FLD course, with 55 (69.7%) of participants completing the course. Of those that registered, 46 (58.2%) self-identified as underrepresented in medicine, 32 (40.5%) self-identified with she/her/hers pronouns, and 45 (57.0%) held an institutional leadership position. Fifty-nine (74.6%) participants were willing to be randomized. Course engagement was higher in the intensive course with 64.1% and 48.7% participation over days 1 and 2, respectively. In the longitudinal course, participation dropped off every week from 70%, 47.5%, 35%, and 27.5%, throughout the 4-week course. Participants who accessed the online modules spent a median time of 3 h and 34 min. User confidence after completion of each individual module were "somewhat confident" and "completely confident" for almost all survey respondents on a 5-tier Likert scale.
conclusionsThe pilot FLD course appealed to SAGES members in leadership roles and who identified as. URiM. Course engagement was higher in the intensive course. Long-term behavior changes after course completion will need to be assessed with additional qualitative interviews. (300/300 words).
Indexed as
Identifiers
39496948What 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.