Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41883932›Full record

ArticlePRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)2026

Interrater Reliability of a Suture Assessment Tool in Family Medicine Training.

Khyati Patel, Carmen Dargel, Ricky A Aguayo-Ortega, Christopher L Boswell, Stephen K Stacey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.), 2026. 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. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Khyati PatelFamily Medicine Residency, Department of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic Health System, La Crosse, WI.
Carmen DargelDepartment of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic Health System, La Crosse, WI.
Ricky A Aguayo-OrtegaFamily Medicine Residency, Department of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic Health System, La Crosse, WI.
Christopher L BoswellRochester and Kasson Residency Program, Department of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic Health System, Kasson, MN.
Stephen K StaceyDepartment of Family Medicine, Mayo Clinic Health System, La Crosse, WI.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Procedural competence is essential to clinical practice, yet assessment of technical skills such as suturing remains highly variable and often relies on subjective evaluations. While tools with limited validity evidence exist in surgical specialties, their use in family medicine is limited. This study evaluated the interrater reliability of a suture assessment tool developed by Sundhagen et al when used by family medicine faculty to evaluate the simple interrupted suturing skills of family medicine residents. Methods: In this cross-sectional reliability study, 15 core faculty members from four family medicine residency programs were recruited to evaluate the simple interrupted suturing skills of 20 family medicine residents using a modified suture assessment tool developed by Sundhagen et al. Intraclass correlation coefficients were used to evaluate interrater reliability. Light's κ was calculated for each question. Results: A total of 15 evaluators assessed 20 videos of resident suturing performance. The Light's κ estimates ranged from 0.11 to 0.50, indicating slight to moderate agreement. None of the items reached the threshold for substantial agreement (κ≥0.61). Conclusions: The modified Sundhagen suture assessment tool demonstrated fair to moderate reliability when used to evaluate family medicine residents. While the level of agreement limits the tool's effectiveness for standardized summative assessment, the tool may still offer value as a structured framework for formative feedback. Future studies may improve reliability through refined rater training, behaviorally anchored scoring criteria, and the use of visual exemplars.

Identifiers

PMID41883932
PMCPMC13012584

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.