Surgeons as Educators A Guide for Academic Development and Teaching Excellence

(Ben Green) #1

90



  1. Aghazadeh MA, et al. External validation of Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills
    (GEARS). Surg Endosc. 2015;29(11):3261–6.

  2. Sánchez R, et al. Robotic surgery training: construct validity of Global Evaluative Assessment
    of Robotic Skills (GEARS). J Robot Surg. 2016;10(3):227–31.

  3. Nabhani J, et  al. MP11-11 analysis of Global Evaluative Assessment Of Robotic Surgery
    (GEARS) as an immediate assessment tool in robotic surgery curriculum. J Urol.
    2016;195(4):e115–6.

  4. Ghani KR, et al. Measuring to improve: peer and crowd-sourced assessments of technical skill
    with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2016;69(4):547–50.

  5. Kowalewski TM, et  al. Crowd-sourced assessment of technical skills for validation of basic
    laparoscopic urologic skills tasks. J Urol. 2016;195(6):1859–65.

  6. Chen C, et al. Crowd-sourced assessment of technical skills: a novel method to evaluate surgi-
    cal performance. J Surg Res. 2014;187(1):65–71.

  7. Lendvay TS, et  al. Virtual reality robotic surgery warm-up improves task performance in
    a dry laboratory environment: a prospective randomized controlled study. J Am Coll Surg.
    2013;216(6):1181–92.

  8. van Empel PJ, et al. Objective versus subjective assessment of laparoscopic skill. ISRN Minim
    Invasive Surg. 2013;1–6

  9. Anderson DD, et al. Objective Structured Assessments of Technical Skills (OSATS) does not
    assess the quality of the surgical result effectively. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(4):874–81.

  10. Yule S, et  al. Surgeons’ non-technical skills in the operating room: reliability testing of the
    NOTSS behavior rating system. World J Surg. 2008;32(4):548–56.

  11. Pugh CM, et al. Intra-operative decision making: more than meets the eye. J Biomed Inform.
    2011;44(3):486–96.

  12. Skinner A. Retention and retraining of integrated cognitive and psychomotor skills. Proceedings
    of the Interservice/Industry Training Systems & Education Conference, 2014, Orlando; 2014.

  13. Skinner A, Lathan C, Meadors M, Sevrechts M.  Training and retention of medical skills.
    Proceedings of the Interservice/Industry Training Systems & Education Conference, 2012,
    Orlando; 2012.

  14. Pugh C, et al. Outcome measures for surgical simulators: is the focus on technical skills the
    best approach? Surgery. 2010;147(5):646–54.

  15. Parker SH, et al. The Surgeons’ Leadership Inventory (SLI): a taxonomy and rating system for
    surgeons’ intraoperative leadership skills. Am J Surg. 2013;205(6):745–51.

  16. Mishra A, Catchpole K, McCulloch P. The Oxford NOTECHS System: reliability and validity
    of a tool for measuring teamwork behaviour in the operating theatre. Qual Saf Health Care.
    2009;18(2):104–8.

  17. Hull L, et  al. Observational teamwork assessment for surgery: content validation and tool
    refinement. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212(2):234–43.e5.

  18. Nathwani JN, et  al. Relationship between technical errors and decision-making skills in the
    junior resident. J Surg Educ. 2016;73(6):e84–90.

  19. DaRosa D, et  al. Impact of a structured skills laboratory curriculum on surgery residents’
    intraoperative decision-making and technical skills. Acad Med. 2008;83(10):S68–71.

  20. D’Angelo A-LD, et al. Use of decision-based simulations to assess resident readiness for oper-
    ative independence. Am J Surg. 2015;209(1):132–9.

  21. Dedy NJ, et al. Teaching nontechnical skills in surgical residency: a systematic review of cur-
    rent approaches and outcomes. Surgery. 2013;154(5):1000–8.

  22. Birkmeyer JD, et al. Surgical skill and complication rates after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med.
    2013;369(15):1434–42.

  23. Hull L, et al. The impact of nontechnical skills on technical performance in surgery: a system-
    atic review. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214(2):214–30.

  24. Miller A, Archer J. Impact of workplace based assessment on doctors’ education and perfor-
    mance: a systematic review. BMJ. 2010;341:c5064.

  25. Norcini J, et al. Criteria for good assessment: consensus statement and recommendations from
    the Ottawa 2010 Conference. Med Teach. 2011;33(3):206–14.


E.I. George et al.
Free download pdf