Dataset Information

Evidence-Based Cognitive Endoscopy Simulators: Do They Exist? A Systematic Search and Evaluation of Existing Platforms.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The development of guidelines by gastroenterology societies increasingly stresses evidence-based endoscopic practice.

Aims

We performed a systematic assessment to determine whether endoscopic video teaching platforms incorporate evidence-based educational strategies and methods in order to disseminate guideline-based endoscopic management strategies.

Methods

Platforms with a video component were systematically identified using the Google search engine, Apple and Android application stores, and searching four major gastroenterology society websites and three known platforms, to identify all relevant platforms. Two video samples from each teaching platform were reviewed independently by two authors and assessed for use of a priori defined principles of evidence-based medicine, as determined by consensus agreement and for the use of simulation.

Results

Fourteen platforms were included in the final analysis, and two videos from each were analyzed. One of the 14 platforms used simulation and incorporated evidence-based medicine principles consistently. Nine of the 14 platforms were not transparent in regard to citation. None of the platforms consistently cited the certainty of evidence or explained how evidence was selected.

Conclusions

Education of guideline-based endoscopic management strategies using principles of evidence-based medicine is under-utilized in endoscopic videos. In addition, the use of cognitive simulation is absent in this arena. There is a paucity of evidence-based cognitive endoscopy simulators designed for fellows that incorporate systematic evaluation, and efforts should be made to create this platform.

SUBMITTER: Shah R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9199333 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evidence-Based Cognitive Endoscopy Simulators: Do They Exist? A Systematic Search and Evaluation of Existing Platforms.

Shah Raj R Kurin Michael M Satyavada Sagarika S Ismail Mayada M Smith Zachary Z Davitkov Perica P Isenberg Gerard G Gottumukkala Raju R Faulx Ashley A Falck-Ytter Yngve Y Chak Amitabh A

Digestive diseases and sciences 20220615 3

<h4>Background</h4>The development of guidelines by gastroenterology societies increasingly stresses evidence-based endoscopic practice.<h4>Aims</h4>We performed a systematic assessment to determine whether endoscopic video teaching platforms incorporate evidence-based educational strategies and methods in order to disseminate guideline-based endoscopic management strategies.<h4>Methods</h4>Platforms with a video component were systematically identified using the Google search engine, Apple and ...[more]

PMID: 35704254

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPerforated peptic ulcer remains a common contributor to morbidity and mortality rates worldwide. In common with other emergency surgery conditions, there is a trend towards minimally invasive surgery. This review aims to describe current evidence comparing open and laparoscopic management strategies for perforated peptic ulcers, by summarizing patients, intervention, comparator, outcomes, describing intervention components and delivery, outcomes reported and assessing study pragmatism (applicability) using PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2.MethodsSystematic searches of published literature were performed using Ovid MEDLINE and Embase online databases, as well as clinical trial databases. Randomized trials comparing laparoscopic and open repair of peptic ulcer were included. Data extracted included study metadata, patients, intervention, comparator, outcomes elements, technical aspects of interventions and use of co-interventions, and surgeon learning curves/experience. Applicability was assessed using the PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 tool, to explore whether trials were predominantly pragmatic or explanatory, and study validity assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool.ResultsA total of 408 studies were screened for eligibility, with nine finally included (880 patients). Incision, ulcer closure details and lavage were the most frequently reported aspects of laparoscopic repair. Co-interventions such as antibiotic use and analgesia were reported in most articles, whilst nutrition and Helicobacter pylori eradication were not reported. Interventions were generally delivered by high-volume laparoscopic surgeons. Studies were considered at high Risk-of-Bias. PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 assessment found studies were neither fully pragmatic nor explanatory.ConclusionLaparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is a variably defined intervention. Consideration of how intervention components and co-interventions should be optimally delivered is required to facilitate a well designed randomized trial.

Dataset Information

Evidence-Based Cognitive Endoscopy Simulators: Do They Exist? A Systematic Search and Evaluation of Existing Platforms.

Background

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Evidence-Based Cognitive Endoscopy Simulators: Do They Exist? A Systematic Search and Evaluation of Existing Platforms.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets