Claims

Junior and non-cardiothoracic residents show larger time improvements from coronary anastomosis simulation than senior residents

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

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? Subgroup analysis found time improvement of 293 seconds for junior and non-cardiothoracic residents versus 120 seconds for senior residents (P = 0.003). → O'Dwyer M 2022

Evidence

O'Dwyer M 2022

O'Dwyer M, Fleming CA, Ahern S, Barrett S, Raftery NB, Ní Dhonnchú T, Doddakula K. (2022). Objective improvement with coronary anastomosis simulation training: meta-analysis. BJS Open. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrab147

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Subgroup analysis (test for subgroup differences, Fig. 3) comparing time improvement between junior/non-cardiothoracic residents and senior residents. The article reports "293 versus 120 s, P = 0.003" but notes high heterogeneity between groups limits interpretation.

"Subgroup analysis demonstrated that simulation in junior and non-cardiothoracic residents was associated with more of a positive impact when compared with senior residents, as regards time improvement (293 versus 120 s, P = 0.003)"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.