Cited by 19Simulation-Based Education in HealthcareSurgical Simulation and TrainingInnovations in Medical Education

Developing a Canadian Curriculum for Simulation-Based Education in Obstetrics and Gynaecology: A Delphi Study

Craig, Catherine, Posner, Glenn D.·2017·Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada

Abstract

Objective As obstetrics and gynaecology (Ob/Gyn) residency training programs move towards a competence-based approach to training and assessment, the development of a national standardized simulation curriculum is essential. The primary goal of this study was to define the fundamental content for the Canadian Obstetrics and Gynecology Simulation curriculum.Methods A modified Delphi technique was used to achieve consensus in three rounds by surveying residency program directors or their local simulation educator delegates in 16 accredited Canadian Ob/Gyn residency programs. A consensus rate of 80% was agreed upon. Survey results were collected over 11 months in 2016.Results Response rates for the Delphi were 50% for the first round, 81% for the second round, and 94% for the third round. The first survey resulted in 84 suggested topics. These were organized into four categories: obstetrics high acuity low frequency events, obstetrics common events, gynaecology high acuity low frequency events, and gynaecology common events. Using the modified Delphi method, consensus was reached on 6 scenarios.Conclusion This study identified the content for a national simulation-based curriculum for Ob/Gyn residency training programs and is the first step in the development of this curriculum.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jogc.2017.04.032

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 70% threshold was based on previous Delphi studies used for curriculum development.

    “The 70% threshold was based on previous Delphi studies used for curriculum development21–25.”
  • The approach was based on similar studies that successfully used expert opinions to create or update curricula in medicine for different subject areas, leveraging their structures to ensure the process was thorough.

    “We also based our approach on similar studies that have successfully used expert opinions to create or update curricula in medicine for different subject areas, leveraging their structures to ensure our process was thorough21–25.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Craig, C., & Posner, G. D.
Affiliations
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
Corresponding author
Posner, Glenn D.
Venue
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-09
Volume
39
Issue
9
Pages
757-763
ISSN
1701-2163 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2609893885
Cited by
19
References
10
Citations by year
2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Surgical Simulation and Training
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
simulation-based education, curriculum development, competence-based training, gynecology, obstetrics, consensus building, Canadian residency programs
MeSH terms
Simulation Training, Curriculum, Delphi Technique, Female, Gynecology, Humans, Obstetrics, Pregnancy, Gynecologic Surgical Procedures, Obstetric Surgical Procedures

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