Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 10/2003

01-10-2003 | Original article

Fundamental principles of validation, and reliability: rigorous science for the assessment of surgical education and training

Authors: A. G. Gallagher, E. M. Ritter, R. M. Satava

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 10/2003

Login to get access

Excerpt

Surgery has always been a dynamic discipline. It has a long history of groundbreaking innovations that dramatically improved the way patients were treated and surgery was practiced. However, nothing could have prepared the surgical community for the revolutionary advances of the last 2 decades. Almost overnight, the traditional open approach to surgery was replaced by a minimally invasive surgery (MIS) approach [2]. Practitioners quickly realized that this novel approach would require new types of training. Suddenly, the directors of surgical residency programs had to deal with faculty members who were questioning the training paradigm that had served surgery well for a century. The traditional Halsteadian method did not seem to be suitable for the new types of skills required for MIS. To make matters worse, the length of time allocated to training residents was contracting. In the European Union in 2001 the European Working time Directive was extended to include physicians in training and this year in the United States of America the mandatory 80 hour work week restriction has been instituted, both dramatically reducing work/training hours for residents. …
Literature
1.
go back to reference American Psychological Association (APA) American Educational Research Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education1974Standards for educational and psychological tests.APAWashington (DC) American Psychological Association (APA) American Educational Research Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education1974Standards for educational and psychological tests.APAWashington (DC)
2.
go back to reference Anonymous, S 1990Cholecystectomy, practice transformed [Editorial].Lancet338789790 Anonymous, S 1990Cholecystectomy, practice transformed [Editorial].Lancet338789790
3.
go back to reference Cooper, C 1998Individual Differences.ArnoldLondon Cooper, C 1998Individual Differences.ArnoldLondon
4.
go back to reference Cronbach, LJ 1984Essentials of psychological testing. (2nd ed.)Harper & RowNew York Cronbach, LJ 1984Essentials of psychological testing. (2nd ed.)Harper & RowNew York
5.
go back to reference Hanna, GB, Shimi, SM, Cuschieri, A 1998Randomised study of influence of two-dimensional versus three-dimensional imaging on performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Lancet351248251CrossRefPubMed Hanna, GB, Shimi, SM, Cuschieri, A 1998Randomised study of influence of two-dimensional versus three-dimensional imaging on performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Lancet351248251CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Horton, R 1996Surgical research or comic opera: questions, but few answers [Editorial].Lancet13347 Horton, R 1996Surgical research or comic opera: questions, but few answers [Editorial].Lancet13347
7.
go back to reference Jöreskog, KG, Sörbom, D 1993LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language.Scientific Software InternationalChicago Jöreskog, KG, Sörbom, D 1993LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language.Scientific Software InternationalChicago
8.
go back to reference Kazdin, AE 1998Behavior modification in applied settings.Brooks/ColePacific Grove (CA) Kazdin, AE 1998Behavior modification in applied settings.Brooks/ColePacific Grove (CA)
9.
go back to reference Martin, P, Bateson, P 1986Measuring behaviour: as an introductory guide.Cambridge University PressCambridge (UK) Martin, P, Bateson, P 1986Measuring behaviour: as an introductory guide.Cambridge University PressCambridge (UK)
10.
go back to reference Reber, AS 1995The Penguin dictionary of psychology. (2nd ed.)PenguinNew York Reber, AS 1995The Penguin dictionary of psychology. (2nd ed.)PenguinNew York
Metadata
Title
Fundamental principles of validation, and reliability: rigorous science for the assessment of surgical education and training
Authors
A. G. Gallagher
E. M. Ritter
R. M. Satava
Publication date
01-10-2003
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 10/2003
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-003-0035-4

Other articles of this Issue 10/2003

Surgical Endoscopy 10/2003 Go to the issue