Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital

Gathering Validity Evidence for Surgical Simulation: A Systematic Review

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. Metabolic Systems Analysis of Shock-Induced Endotheliopathy (SHINE) in Trauma: A New Research Paradigm

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Acute Kidney Injury in Critically-ill Patients With COVID-19: A Single-center Experience of 206 Consecutive Patients

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Gastrointestinal Complications in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Comment on "Epidural Analgesia (TEA) vs. IV-PCA After Open Liver Surgery"

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftKommentar/debatForskningpeer review

  1. Defining the surgical footprint in cataract surgery: patient-related outcomes dependent on the experience of the surgeon

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Validation of a novel simulation-based test in robot-assisted radical prosta-tectomy

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Telementoring and remote training in the present era

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftLetterForskningpeer review

  4. Prevalence of Charles Bonnet syndrome in patients with glaucoma: a systematic review with meta-analyses

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer 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.

TidsskriftAnnals of Surgery
Udgave nummer6
Sider (fra-til)1063-1068
Antal sider6
StatusUdgivet - jun. 2018

ID: 56243699