Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Gathering Validity Evidence for Surgical Simulation: A Systematic Review

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. Robotic Surgery Is Less Physically Demanding Than Laparoscopic Surgery: Paired Cross Sectional Study

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Response to Comment on "Polypropylene Mesh and Fertility"

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. The S100A10 Pathway Mediates an Occult Hyperfibrinolytic Subtype in Trauma Patients

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Response to the Comment on "Should We Have a Little More Patience With the Conventional 2-Stage Hepatectomy?"

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftLetterForskningpeer review

  1. Simulation-based training for flexible cystoscopy - A randomized trial comparing two approaches

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Development and validation of a multiple-choice questionnaire-based theoretical test in direct ophthalmoscopy

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Needs assessment to identify content for simulation-based curricula in emergency medicine

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Ultralydskanning bør være en del af den objektive undersøgelse

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

OBJECTIVE: To identify current trends in the use of validity frameworks in surgical simulation, to provide an overview of the evidence behind the assessment of technical skills in all surgical specialties, and to present recommendations and guidelines for future validity studies.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Validity evidence for assessment tools used in the evaluation of surgical performance is of paramount importance to ensure valid and reliable assessment of skills.

METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature by searching 5 databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library) for studies published from January 1, 2008, to July 10, 2017. We included original studies evaluating simulation-based assessments of health professionals in surgical specialties and extracted data on surgical specialty, simulator modality, participant characteristics, and the validity framework used. Data were synthesized qualitatively.

RESULTS: We identified 498 studies with a total of 18,312 participants. Publications involving validity assessments in surgical simulation more than doubled from 2008 to 2010 (∼30 studies/year) to 2014 to 2016 (∼70 to 90 studies/year). Only 6.6% of the studies used the recommended contemporary validity framework (Messick). The majority of studies used outdated frameworks such as face validity. Significant differences were identified across surgical specialties. The evaluated assessment tools were mostly inanimate or virtual reality simulation models.

CONCLUSION: An increasing number of studies have gathered validity evidence for simulation-based assessments in surgical specialties, but the use of outdated frameworks remains common. To address the current practice, this paper presents guidelines on how to use the contemporary validity framework when designing validity studies.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftAnnals of Surgery
Vol/bind267
Udgave nummer6
Sider (fra-til)1063-1068
Antal sider6
ISSN0003-4932
DOI
StatusUdgivet - jun. 2018

ID: 56243699