Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39810034›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2025

Innate Versus Acquired: A Review of Predictive Technical Aptitude Assessments in Surgical Trainee Selection.

Harrison M Drebin, Zoë C Cohen, Christopher B Anderson, Gina M Badalato

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2025. 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. Review
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

4 authors.

Harrison M DrebinColumbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, 10032, USA. hmd2150@cumc.columbia.edu.
Zoë C CohenDepartment of Urology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Christopher B Anderson *Department of Urology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA.
Gina M Badalato *Department of Urology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, 10032, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe evaluation and selection process of similarly qualified applicants for surgical residency positions in the United States (US) is challenging. Technical aptitude assessments may provide an opportunity to improve the selection process by offering insight into a candidate's technical skills. The use of these assessments prompts consideration of the degree to which technical aptitude in surgery is innate versus acquired. In this narrative review, we review the state of these assessments and the limitations of developing and validating these instruments. RECENT

findingsRecent evidence suggests that technical aptitude can be quantified in medical students prior to selection for surgical training; however, both technical aptitude and dedicated practice of technical skills influence operative performance. In the US, technical aptitude assessments are inconsistently used in selecting candidates for surgical residency. Internationally, few countries have implemented standardized technical aptitude assessments in their surgical trainee selection processes. The development of technical aptitude assessments is ongoing worldwide. Technical aptitude assessments may help identify individuals particularly well-suited for a surgical career or those who might benefit from additional practice or remediation. The potential role of technical aptitude assessments in the selection process for surgical trainees remains uncertain. Consideration of these instruments requires an understanding of meaningful outcomes associated with particular technical assessments as well as the assessments' limitations.

Indexed as

AptitudeAptitude TestsClinical CompetenceGeneral SurgeryInternship and ResidencySchool Admission CriteriaEducational MeasurementHumansUnited StatesAptitude assessmentAptitude examinationResidency selectionSurgical aptitudeSurgical selectionTechnical aptitude

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.