How can surgeons facilitate resident intraoperative decision-making?
Abstract
Background Cognitive skills such as decision-making are critical to developing operative autonomy. We explored resident decision-making using a recollection of specific examples, from the attending surgeon and resident, after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods In a separate semi-structured interview, the attending and resident both answered five questions, regarding the resident's operative roles and decisions, ways the attending helped, times when the attending operated, and the effect of the relationship between attending and resident. Themes were extracted using inductive methods. Results Thirty interviews were completed after 15 cases. Facilitators of decision-making included dialogue, safe struggle, and appreciation for retraction. Aberrant case characteristics, anatomic uncertainties, and time pressures provided barriers. Attending-resident mismatches included descriptions of transitioning control to the attending. Conclusions Reciprocal dialogue, including concept-driven feedback, is helpful during intraoperative teaching. Unanticipated findings impede resident decision-making, and we describe differences in understanding transfers of operative control. Given these factors, we suggest that pre-operative discussions may be beneficial.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The hierarchical verification-driven workflow used in radiology improves the diagnostic accuracy of the final report.
“This hierarchical, verification-driven workflow improves diagnostic accuracy of the final report”
From MARCH: Multi-Agent Radiology Clinical Hierarchy for CT Report Generation (2026) · cites this paper as Hill et al., 2017
Cited by
Sorted by citations
MARCH: Multi-Agent Radiology Clinical Hierarchy for CT Report Generation
Lin, Y., Ding, Y., Wu, Y., & Peng, Y. (2026) · Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2026.acl-short.24 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hill, K. A., Dasari, M., Littleton, E. B., & Hamad, G. G.
- Affiliations
- UPMC Presbyterian (US)
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Magee-Womens Hospital (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hill, Katherine A.
- Dasari, Mohini
- Littleton, Eliza B.
- Hamad, Giselle G.
- Venue
- The American Journal of Surgery
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2017-10
- Volume
- 214
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 583-588
- ISSN
- 0002-9610 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2638391178
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 0.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The American Journal of Surgery (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Simulation and Training
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Keywords
- surgical residents, intraoperative decision-making, operative autonomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, intraoperative teaching, feedback, time pressure, surgical training
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Clinical Competence, Decision Making, Education, Medical, Graduate, Female, Humans, Internship and Residency, Interviews as Topic, Male, Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic, Surgeons
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review