An interventional study of Randomized video numbers in Clinical Competence, sponsored by Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation. Completed at 1 site in Denmark. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-11-07.
Sponsored by Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
The goal of this comparative blinded assessment study is to compare ratings of crowd workers and expert ratings in simulated robot-assisted radical prostatectomies
The main question[s] it aims to answer are:
3.4 Video material The participants will be assessing the videos using the assessment tool in a survey sent by E-boks. The surveys will be sent using a URL-link from Redcap. All videos are stored at 23video system and a link to the videos will be included in the survey. The survey has successfully been tested on different devices.
The investigators will randomly choose videos from the third repetition from 5 novice surgeons, 5 experienced robotic surgeons and 5 experienced robotic surgeons in RARP. The investigators will use edited videos to the length of maximum 5 minutes. The videos will be edited from start (0 minutes) and 5 minutes forward, where the video will be stopped. Therefore, the videos will show how far the surgeon has come after 5 minutes of simulated operation. A total of 4548 edited videos will be used for crowd-sourced assessment.
To secure response process of Messick's framework all participants will be blinded to the identity and skill level of the surgeon on the recorded video. The experienced surgeons could potentially rate their own videos, which could be a threat to validity for the response process, but as the vide-os are blinded, they will not know which videos are their own. In addition, there will be a signifi-cant time delay between them having performed the task and rating the videos. Thus, it is unlikely that they will be able to identify their own videos. All videos will be given a randomly allocated identification ID.
3.5 Video-rating Each participant will rate ten randomly chosen videos using GEARS. The participants will be given a randomized ID number, which is used to match the ten videos to the participant. They will be asked to evaluate each video with the five different domains of GEARS on a scale from one to five. After rating the video, the participant will be asked to answer 'yes' or 'no' to the question: 'Would the participant trust this doctor to operate on he participant, if the participant were to have their prostate removed using robotic-assisted surgery?'. The participants will fill in the answers after the video-rating in RedCap.
3.6 Evaluation questions After the crowd-raters finish the video-ratings, they will receive a final questionnaire in RedCap, where they are asked their opinion about a possible future role as crowd-raters regarding time use and possible payment level (appendix 4).
3.7 Data-collection All data will be collected and stored in RedCap, which is a platform designed to store research data. All data will be pseudo anonymized as all participants will get a unique link only known to the participant and the principal investigator (RGO). The participants can only rate the video once. The data will be blinded by RGO prior to statistical analysis.
The expert panel will be invited by e-mail.
Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation is the lead sponsor of 27 studies on the registry; 6 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Laypersons
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Expert raters
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Crowd workers watched 10 (oiut 45 possible) random videos and assessed with a standard assessment tool. All participants were blinded to the identity and skill level of the surgeon
Procedure: Randomized video numbers
See arm/group description
to examine the use of crowdsourced assessment for assessing the performance of robot-assisted rad-ical prostatectomy (RARP) compared with using experienced surgeons
To what degree do the GEARS scores correlate with experienced surgeons? A rating of 1 corresponds to the lowest level of performance, whereas a rating of 5 corresponds to the highest level of performance. An overall performance score is derived by summing the scores of each of the domains (5-25 points)by patients.
Time frame: immediately after the study completion
To explore if some CW are better than others
Does some CW perform closer to the expert raters than others (stratified by age, gender, education in the medical field yes/no)
Time frame: immediately after the study completion
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation