↓ Skip to main content

Towards development and validation of an intraoperative assessment tool for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy training: results of a Delphi study

Overview of attention for article published in International Brazilian Journal of Urology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Towards development and validation of an intraoperative assessment tool for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy training: results of a Delphi study
Published in
International Brazilian Journal of Urology, January 2017
DOI 10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2016.0420
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher Morris, Jen Hoogenes, Bobby Shayegan, Edward D. Matsumoto

Abstract

As urology training shifts toward competency-based frameworks, the need for tools for high stakes assessment of trainees is crucial. Validated assessment metrics are lacking for many robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). As it is quickly becoming the gold standard for treatment of localized prostate cancer, the development and validation of a RARP assessment tool for training is timely. We recruited 13 expert RARP surgeons from the United States and Canada to serve as our Delphi panel. Using an initial inventory developed via a modified Delphi process with urology residents, fellows, and staff at our institution, panelists iteratively rated each step and sub-step on a 5-point Likert scale of agreement for inclusion in the final assessment tool. Qualitative feedback was elicited for each item to determine proper step placement, wording, and suggestions. Panelist's responses were compiled and the inventory was edited through three iterations, after which 100% consensus was achieved. The initial inventory steps were decreased by 13% and a skip pattern was incorporated. The final RARP stepwise inventory was comprised of 13 critical steps with 52 sub-steps. There was no attrition throughout the Delphi process. Our Delphi study resulted in a comprehensive inventory of intraoperative RARP steps with excellent consensus. This final inventory will be used to develop a valid and psychometrically sound intraoperative assessment tool for use during RARP training and evaluation, with the aim of increasing competency of all trainees.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 13 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 17 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 November 2017.
All research outputs
#21,110,894
of 25,932,719 outputs
Outputs from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#475
of 736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#323,837
of 425,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Brazilian Journal of Urology
#27
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,932,719 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 736 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 425,130 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.