The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Ottawa Surgical Competency Operating Room Evaluation (O-SCORE): A Tool to Assess Surgical Competence
Abstract
PURPOSE: Most assessment of surgical trainees is based on measures of knowledge, with limited evaluation of their competence to actually perform various surgical procedures. In this study, the authors evaluated a tool they designed to assess a trainee's competence to perform an entire surgical procedure independently, regardless of procedure type or postgraduate year (PGY). METHOD: In phase 1, the Ottawa Surgical Competency Operating Room Evaluation (O-SCORE) was piloted in the University of Ottawa's Division of Orthopaedic Surgery. In phase 2, the refined 11-item tool (8 items rated on a 5-point competency scale, 1 item assessing procedural competence, 2 feedback items) was used in the Divisions of Orthopaedic Surgery and General Surgery to assess residents' performance on 11 common procedures. Quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted. RESULTS: In phase 2, 34 orthopaedic and general surgeons assessed the performance of 37 residents in 163 procedures. ANOVA demonstrated an effect of PGY. Post hoc analysis found that total procedure scores for PGYs 1 and 2 were lower than those for PGY 3 (P<.001), and PGY 3 scores were lower than those for PGYs 4 and 5 (P<.02). Analysis of qualitative data indicated that the rating scale was practical and useful for surgeons and residents. CONCLUSIONS: This novel evaluation tool successfully discriminated between junior and senior residents and identified surgical competency across various PGY levels regardless of procedure type. Multiple sources of evidence support the O-SCORE as a valid tool for the assessment of trainee operative competency.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (2008) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199231881.001.0001 · Cited by 2,631
Objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) for surgical residents
Martin, J. A., Regehr, G., Reznick, R., Macrae, H., Murnaghan, J., Hutchison, C., & Brown, M. (1997) · British Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.1800840237 · Cited by 2,527
Current Concepts in Validity and Reliability for Psychometric Instruments: Theory and Application
Cook, D. A., & Beckman, T. J. (2006) · The American Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.10.036 · Cited by 1,745
Testing technical skill via an innovative “bench station” examination
Reznick, R., Regehr, G., MacRae, H., Martin, J., & McCulloch, W. (1997) · The American Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/s0002-9610(97)89597-9 · Cited by 1,048
Assessment of clinical competence
Wass, V., Van der Vleuten, C., Shatzer, J., & Jones, R. (2001) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)04221-5 · Cited by 1,024
A global assessment tool for evaluation of intraoperative laparoscopic skills
Vassiliou, M. C., Feldman, L. S., Andrew, C. G., Bergman, S., Leffondré, K., Stanbridge, D., & Fried, G. M. (2005) · The American Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.04.004 · Cited by 917
The Mini-CEX: A Method for Assessing Clinical Skills
Norcini, J. J., Blank, L. L., Duffy, F. D., & Fortna, G. S. (2003) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-138-6-200303180-00012 · Cited by 730
Teaching and testing technical skills
Reznick, R. K. (1993) · The American Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/s0002-9610(05)80843-8 · Cited by 541
The Mini-CEX (Clinical Evaluation Exercise): A Preliminary Investigation
Norcini, J. J., Blank, L. L., Arnold, G. K., & Kimball, H. R. (1995) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-123-10-199511150-00008 · Cited by 525
Datta, V., Mackay, S., Mandalia, M., & Darzi, A. (2001) · Journal of the American College of Surgeons · doi:10.1016/s1072-7515(01)01041-9 · Cited by 415
Cited by
Surgical skill and complication rates after bariatric surgery
Birkmeyer, J. D., Finks, J. F., O'Reilly, A., Oerline, M., Carlin, A. M., Nunn, A. R., Dimick, J., Banerjee, M., & Birkmeyer, N. J. O. (2013) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa1300625 · Cited by 1,504
George, B. C., Teitelbaum, E. N., Meyerson, S. L., Schuller, M. C., DaRosa, D. A., Petrusa, E. R., Petito, L. C., & Fryer, J. P. (2014) · Journal of Surgical Education · doi:10.1016/j.jsurg.2014.06.018 · Cited by 340
Hall, A. K., Rich, J., Dagnone, J. D., Weersink, K., Caudle, J., Sherbino, J., Frank, J. R., Bandiera, G., & Van Melle, E. (2020) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000003040 · Cited by 104
Technical performance score is associated with outcomes after the Norwood procedure
Nathan, M., Sleeper, L. A., Ohye, R. G., Frommelt, P. C., Caldarone, C. A., Tweddell, J. S., Lu, M., Pearson, G. D., Gaynor, J. W., Pizarro, C., et al. (2014) · The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery · doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.05.076 · Cited by 54
Evaluating feedback comments in entrustable professional activities: a cross-sectional study
Andreou, V., Peters, S., Eggermont, J., & Schoenmakers, B. (2024) · Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development · doi:10.1177/23821205241275810 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Gofton, W. T., Dudek, N. L., Wood, T. J., Balaa, F., & Hamstra, S. J.
- Venue
- Academic Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2012-10
- Volume
- 87
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1401-1407
- ISSN
- 1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2015336238
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 6.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Ottawa Surgical Competency Operating Room Evaluation (O-SCORE): A Tool to Assess Surgical Competence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/acm.0b013e3182677805
- The paper
- Gofton, W. T., Dudek, N. L., Wood, T. J., Balaa, F., & Hamstra, S. J. (2012). The Ottawa Surgical Competency Operating Room Evaluation (O-SCORE): A Tool to Assess Surgical Competence. Academic Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e3182677805
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
