ArticleJournal of educational evaluation for health professions2025
Correlation between a motion analysis method and Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills for assessing interns' performance in a simulated peg transfer task in Jordan: a validation study
Article in Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to validate the use of ProAnalyst (Xcitex Inc.), a program for professional motion analysts to assess the performance of surgical interns while performing the peg transfer task in a simulator box for safe practice in real minimally invasive surgery.
methodsA correlation study was conducted in a multidisciplinary skills simulation lab at the Faculty of Medicine, Jordan University of Science and Technology from October 2019 to February 2020. Forty-one interns (i.e., novices and intermediates) were recruited, and an expert surgeon participated as a reference benchmark. Videos of participants’ performance were analyzed using ProAnalyst and the Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS). The two sets of results were analyzed to identify correlations.
resultsThe motion analysis scores from Proanalyst were correlated with those from GOALS for efficiency (r=+0.38, P<0.05), autonomy (r=+0.63, P<0.01), depth perception (r=+0.43, P<0.05), dexterity (r=+0.71, P<0.001), and operation flow (r=+0.88, P<0.001). Both assessment methods differentiated the participants’ performance based on their experience level.
conclusionThe motion analysis scoring method using Proanalyst provides an objective, time-efficient, and reproducible assessment of interns’ performance, with results comparable to those obtained using GOALS. It may require initial training and set-up; however, it eliminates the need for expert surgeon judgment.
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.