ArticleNeurosurgery practice2025
Madison Objective Self-Assessment Tool: A Reliable and User-Friendly Approach for Objective Self-Assessment in Microvascular Anastomosis Training.
Article in Neurosurgery practice, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThorough and objective assessment is of utmost importance for any microsurgical laboratory training, allowing trainees to identify areas needing further improvement. The ideal assessment tool should be objective, reliable, self-administered, and easy to implement. Building on this necessity, the aim of this study was to establish an objective, reliable, and self-administered assessment tool for microsurgical laboratory training, enabling trainees to independently practice and assess their own results.
methodsEight trainees completed the Baskaya Microvascular Bypass Training Curriculum using a basic microsurgery training kit. Each trainee evaluated their 31 end products twice with the newly introduced Madison Objective Self-Assessment Tool (MOST). Subsequently, the same expert independently evaluated each trainee's end products once. These 3 sets of evaluations were compared using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to determine the reliability of the new self-assessment tool, both intrarater and interrater.
resultsThe findings demonstrated that, aside from 2 exercises, the agreement levels for both interrater and intrarater ranged from excellent (ICC >0.90) to acceptable (ICC = 0.61-0.80). For the silicone tube (2 mm) end-to-end anastomosis with 9-0, the interrater ICC showed fair agreement, at 0.32 [-0.10 to 0.63], and for the chicken vessels side-to-side anastomosis with 10-0, interrater ICC demonstrated moderate agreement at 0.52 [0.16-0.76]. These results underscore the reliability of MOST. In addition, participant feedback highlighted its ease of use, requiring merely a few minutes to evaluate each end product.
conclusionThis study has demonstrated that the MOST is an effective, objective, and reliable tool for self-evaluation in microvascular anastomosis training, demonstrating high levels of agreement across most exercises and offering a user-friendly experience for trainees. This underscores its suitability as a valuable resource for enabling self-driven microvascular anastomosis training and assessment, especially in places where expert evaluation is unavailable.
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.