| Title |
Development and validation of the TOCO–TURBT tool: a summative assessment tool that measures surgical competency in transurethral resection of bladder tumour
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-018-6251-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna H. de Vries, Arno. M. M. Muijtjens, Hilde G. J. van Genugten, Ad. J. M. Hendrikx, Evert L. Koldewijn, Barbara M. A. Schout, Cees P. M. van der Vleuten, Cordula Wagner, Irene M. Tjiam, Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer |
| Abstract |
The current shift towards competency-based residency training has increased the need for objective assessment of skills. In this study, we developed and validated an assessment tool that measures technical and non-technical competency in transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT). The 'Test Objective Competency' (TOCO)-TURBT tool was designed by means of cognitive task analysis (CTA), which included expert consensus. The tool consists of 51 items, divided into 3 phases: preparatory (n = 15), procedural (n = 21), and completion (n = 15). For validation of the TOCO-TURBT tool, 2 TURBT procedures were performed and videotaped by 25 urologists and 51 residents in a simulated setting. The participants' degree of competence was assessed by a panel of eight independent expert urologists using the TOCO-TURBT tool. Each procedure was assessed by two raters. Feasibility, acceptability and content validity were evaluated by means of a quantitative cross-sectional survey. Regression analyses were performed to assess the strength of the relation between experience and test scores (construct validity). Reliability was analysed by generalizability theory. The majority of assessors and urologists indicated the TOCO-TURBT tool to be a valid assessment of competency and would support the implementation of the TOCO-TURBT assessment as a certification method for residents. Construct validity was clearly established for all outcome measures of the procedural phase (all r > 0.5, p < 0.01). Generalizability-theory analysis showed high reliability (coefficient Phi ≥ 0.8) when using the format of two assessors and two cases. This study provides first evidence that the TOCO-TURBT tool is a feasible, valid and reliable assessment tool for measuring competency in TURBT. The tool has the potential to be used for future certification of competencies for residents and urologists. The methodology of CTA might be valuable in the development of assessment tools in other areas of clinical practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 14% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 11 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 52% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,351,831
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#3,252
of 6,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,309
of 329,782 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#73
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,121 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,782 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.