Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The aim of this study is to collect validity evidence for the ACTION-tool on two different simulators: a porcine rib model, and Thiel embalmed human cadavers. Validity evidence will be collected following Messick's framework.
Educational assessments need a validity argument before they are being used to evaluate trainees. An assessment needs to show it can be used as an objective and reliable tool.
Messick's framework of validity collects this evidence from five different sources: content, response process, relation to other variables, internal structure and consequences.
The ACTION-tool has been developed based on a Delphi consensus study (and has established content evidence as a result). This study will collect evidence from the four remaining sources.
Two groups of participants (novices and experienced) will be recruited. All participants will provide informed consent and demographic information. Afterwards, they will be informed of the study, will familiarise themselves with the simulators, watch an educational video, and will be asked to perform two chest tube insertions (CTI).
All participants will be evaluated by a live rater, and will be recorded using a head-mounted GoPro and an overview camera. The recordings will be edited to ensure anonymization, and will be subsequently rated by three blinded raters.
Statistical analysis will evaluate the difference in mean scores between the groups, the internal structure using G-theory, and will establish a pass/fail score.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Novices | Junior residents from the departments of surgery, pneumology or emergency medicine. These participants are in their first or second year of residency, and have observed or placed less than 5 CTIs in their career. |
| |
| Experienced | Faculty members from Ghent University Hospital from the departments of surgery, pneumology or emergency medicine. These participants must have finished their residency training, and must be involved in resident education. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assessment using the ACTION-tool. | Other | Participants will be assessed using the ACTION-tool while they are performing a CTI on a porcine rib model and Thiel embalmed human cadavers. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Score on on the ACTION-tool | The main goal is the collection of validity evidence for the ACTION-tool following Messick's framework. This is done by recording the score each participant receives while being assessed using the ACTION-tool. The minimum score on the rating scale is 17, the maximum 85 (a higher score indicates a better performance). On the error checklist the minimum score is 0, maximum score is 16 (where a lower score is less observed errors). | Immediately after performing a CTI on the simulator. |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
All participants will be recruited from Ghent University Hospital. Experienced participants are faculty members, and the novice group is recruited from the resident population.
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Wouter Willaert, Prof. Dr. | University Ghent | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ghent University Hospital | Ghent | Oost-Vlaanderen | 9000 | Belgium |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided