Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41473609›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Validation of a Curricular Map on Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices (CIEDs) for Cardiac Anesthesia Trainees.

Ahmed F Zaky, Brittany Hatter, Srilakshmi Malempati, Sai Hemanth Maremalla, Ragib Hasan, Scott Snyder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Ahmed F ZakyAnesthesiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, USA.
Brittany HatterAnesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, USA.
Srilakshmi MalempatiComputer Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, USA.
Sai Hemanth MaremallaComputer Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, USA.
Ragib HasanComputer Science, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, USA.
Scott SnyderEducation, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite an increased exposure of cardiac anesthesia trainees to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), there is a paucity of formal curricula on the subject. Herein, we present the validation of a CIED curricular map by a group of CIED experts and educators. The purpose of this stage of curriculum development is to determine whether experts in education regarding CIEDs consider: (a) the goals and objectives to be critical, (b) the degree to which the instructional materials align with specific objectives, (c) the degree to which the assessments reflect the objectives to which they have been aligned, and (d) the degree to which the assessments are adequately informed by the instructional materials for the aligned objectives.

methodsThe curriculum validation process involved the identification of a national panel of 15 experts in curricula relating to CIEDs. Each panelist received an online survey (Qualtrics), which presented the 17 major learning goals of the curriculum and the instructional objectives for each goal (5-15 objectives per goal). Respondents were asked to rate the importance of each instructional objective (not important, important, and essential), the fit of the objective to the learning goal (does not fit and aligns), and the clarity of the objective (unclear/ambiguous and clear). Respondents were also asked to propose additional objectives that would be needed to adequately represent the learning goal. A content validity ratio (CVR) is computed for each instructional objective based on the proportion of panelists who rate the objective as essential. A content validity index (CVI) is computed for each learning goal based on the sum of the CVRs for the objectives comprising a goal divided by the number of panelists. CVIs of greater than 0.72 across at least three raters are considered to provide sufficient evidence of the validity. Other variables (fit, clarity, and supplemental objectives) within the survey were used to discern and improve the quality of the objectives.

resultsWhile all objectives were rated as important or essential by at least 80% of the 15 raters, several goals had fewer than 70% of their objectives rated as essential by 73% or more of the experts. Notably, six goals (3, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 13) had no objectives rated as essential by more than 73% of the experts. Although the overall CVR and CVI were lower than desired, there was significant agreement regarding the importance of the objectives for each goal. More than 80% of experts indicated that all objectives appropriately fit their respective goals.

conclusionsCIED curriculum is well-received by national experts. Curricular refinements were made to meet the desired goals of agreement before finalizing the curriculum.

Indexed as

anesthesia traineescardiac anesthesiacardiac implantable electronic device (cied)curriculum mappingvalidation

Identifiers

PMID41473609
PMCPMC12747773

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.