Hybrid tools combining checklists with global rating scales (ASSET, OSATS) show promise but require further validation in the live operative theater¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr3·q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2023: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? The ASSET and OSATS hybrid tools have a growing body of evidence across utility index domains, and OSATS demonstrated validity, reliability, feasibility, and educational value in the simulated setting, but further work is required in the live operative theater. → James H.K. 2020
Evidence¶
James H.K. 2020¶
James H.K., Chapman A.W., Pattison G.T.R., Fisher J.D., Griffin D.R. (2020). Analysis of Tools Used in Assessing Technical Skills and Operative Competence in Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgical Training: A Systematic Review. JBJS Reviews. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.19.00167
q2 · i? · review · r3
The review's synthesis of studies of hybrid tools combining task-specific checklists with global rating scales. It names ASSET and OSATS as front-runners, notes the hybrid approach brings both strengths together but becomes long and burdensome, harming feasibility and acceptability.
"There were several studies in this review that demonstrated the validity, reliability, feasibility, and educational value of the OSATS tool in trauma and orthopaedics in the simulated setting (see Appendix Table 3, columns 5 to 11). Further work is required to assess its utility in the live operative theater."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- ASSET is the most commonly used global rating scale for arthroscopic skills assessment, used in 10 of the reviewed studies — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- The 105 included studies of orthopaedic technical-skills assessment were predominantly conducted in simulated settings with 2,088 resident participants — a broader claim this one bears on
- No current technical skills-assessment tool in orthopaedic surgical training fulfills accepted criteria for effective assessment — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.