Using 'Guided-Discovery-Learning' to Optimize and Maximize Transfer of Surgical Simulation View Homepage


Ontology type: schema:MedicalStudy     


Clinical Trial Info

YEARS

2018-2020

ABSTRACT

The study is a randomized experimental study comparing two forms of learning; guided-discovery-learning and traditional instructional learning. Recruiting sixty-four participants, the investigators plan on comparing these two groups through a procedural skill in the form of suturing. In the case of guided-discovery-learning, the group will be allowed a discovery phase before instruction. In contrast, the control group will receive traditional instruction-lead-learning, in which a teacher teaches the participants a skill, and afterwards the participants practice it. After the teaching session, both groups will undertake a post-test of skill-level. A week later both groups will undertake a test for the execution of the learned suturing skill to a more complex version of the original task (Near-transfer). They will also undergo a test for the ability to transfer their learning to a new skill (i.e. preparation for future learning), in this case a new suture (Far-transfer). By filming these tests and having a blinded expert rater score them, the investigators will be able to get a measurement of attained transfer of skill-level throughout the procedures. The investigators hypothesis is that, the participants in the Guided-discovery-group will have an equal score to that of the traditional-learning group in the ability to obtain a skill and transfer it to a more complex version. Furthermore, the investigators hypothesize that the Guided-discovery-group will score better than the traditional-learning group in the case of transferring the procedural knowledge to learning a new skill. As well as testing the efficacy of guided-discovery-learning on a procedural skill, the investigators wish to investigate how and why it works. By filming a subset of participants in each group, as well as using questionnaires, and focus-group interviews the investigators will explore how participants interact in this different learning-environment compared to the traditional instructional learning-environment. Detailed Description BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE: Technical skills are a core competency in surgical specialties. The level of technical skills is directly linked to patient outcomes and it is an absolute requirement that surgical trainees learn to master basic surgical skills. It is therefore a necessity that medical students also become well equipped with these skills, such as suturing. During the last decade, minimally invasive techniques have made their way to the operating room and improved patient outcomes. Despite these advances it is still necessary for surgeons to master the open surgical skills. Unexpected complication can arise in minimally invasive procedures that require conversion to open access surgery. Furthermore, there are procedures where you cannot use minimally invasive techniques. Because of the extensive use of minimally invasive surgery, it is becoming more difficult for doctors as well as medical students in surgical departments to gain the level of experience needed, to become proficient in open surgical techniques. Pre-clinical teaching and simulation training is a possible solution to this problem For novice learners, simulation training is an opportunity to acquire fundamental skills such as suturing in a safe and high-feedback environment and without the difficulties of acquiring these skills in the workplace. For more advanced trainees, simulation affords the practice of difficult and complex procedures which may be otherwise too unsafe to acquire during patient care. But, merely implementing simulation training is no guarantee of educational utility, and instead thoughtful curricular integration of simulation requires considering the role and purpose of the simulator, the student experience, debriefing, and the intended outcomes to evaluate success. One potential area for optimizing simulation-based training is to clarify instructors' roles when providing guidance and direct supervision. One of the challenges with simulation training is the amount of resources this sort of education requires. Especially the amount of time a student spends interacting with an instructor. Supervision and instruction are key to an effective simulation-based training, and there is mounting evidence, which suggest, that the community needs to reconsider the balance between instruction and discovery, allowing for a good interaction between student and teacher, encouraging learning. Therefore the question is; on what level should simulation-based teaching be instructor-orientated? When teaching technical medical skills, the answer to the question, whether the training should be discovery-orientated or instructor-orientated has been thoroughly researched. Medical Education literature has long moved away from the question of either or, and is now more focused on, in which order discovery- and instruction-teaching should be, to provide the best learning outcome. Recent studies has shown some positive results of guided-discovery-learning, which in its simple form, combines both elements from discovery and instruction-based teaching. Especially the ability to 'transfer' learning seems vastly improved, with this teaching method. Transfer tasks faced by learners exist on spectrum with a common challenge being new problems which are more complex or in new contexts but essentially require replication of previously learned skills, i.e. near transfer. While near transfer can be difficult for learners, even more challenging is transfer that requires they apply their previous skills and understanding to learn new skills or concepts, i.e. far transfer. Guided-discovery learning has been shown to especially positively impact this latter type of transfer task. Thus guided-discovery may promote student-autonomy and self-learning which subsequently enables students to take responsibility for their own future learning. In a pilot-study completed by the investigators research-partners at the Wilson-Centre in Toronto, Canada, they compared groups of discovery followed by direct discovery (DD) with instruction followed by discovery (IP). In the case of DD, the participants, where given the materials needed to complete a simple suture, and a finished suture to look at. After the discovery-phase, they were parred with an instructor who demonstrated how it was to be performed. In the IP-case they were first instructed on how to perform the suture, and were afterwards allowed to practice it. At the end of the course both groups were given a post-test of ability, and a week-later both groups were given a retention test as well as a transfer test. The pilot-study included 26 participants in total, divided in two groups of 13. The participants were randomized, and everything was filmed and scored by blinded raters after an international standard. There were no significant results for the immediate post-test as well as the retention test. But in the case of the transfer test, the DD-group was far superior. The investigators study will expand on the pilot-study to provide a comparison of guided discovery to traditional instruction for the learning of suturing tasks in surgery, seeing if Guided-discovery-learning works in a much larger research group. Using a double randomized, mixed-methods experimental design, the investigators will investigate the effect of discovery followed by direct instruction (DD) vs. instruction followed by practice (IP) for the acquisition and two types of transfer of surgical skills. The investigators hypothesize that: 1. Participants in the DD condition will be better able to transfer their knowledge to learning a new skill (i.e., preparation for future learning). 2. Participants in the DD condition will have equivalent performance to IP on post-test, but a similar or slightly improved performance on transfer of suturing skill to a more complex task (near-transfer). 3. Participants in the DD condition will interact differently with instructors and will use their learnings from the discovery phase to scaffold their learning during the direct instruction phase as well as interacting differently with the task at hand. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The study will be performed at CAMES, including n=64 pre-clinical medical students from the Copenhagen University. The investigators are targeting undergraduate students, rather than surgical residents, because they want novice learners, and they believe it is worthwhile to establish efficacy of the intervention group using simpler tasks which can be feasibly studied. The investigators based their sample size on the previous pilot-study which suggests that detecting a large effect on a global rating scale (Hedges g of >0. with an alpha of 0.05 and power of 80% requires at least 13 participants per group with additional participants recruited for potential loss to follow-up for a total of 16 per group. Participants will receive a certificate showing completed suturing course, as an honorarium to compensate for their time in the study. Part 1 of this study is an experimental design with two phases that will test the efficacy of guided discovery: Phase 1 will be a learning phase with the experimental manipulations, and Phase 2 will take place one week later and be outcome assessment for near- and far transfer. Part 2 of this study will be explorative seeking answers to how and why guided-discovery works. For Phase 1, participants will be enrolled and randomly allocated to either the DD or IP groups. Each group consists of 8 participants. Participants will be randomized and the method of teaching allocated on the date of teaching. This will ensure generalization and ease of statistical analysis. In the DD group, participants will be given an example of a completed simple interrupted suture and their own skin pad, and suturing kit. They will then attempt to replicate the suture using the equipment and their own knowledge over 30 minutes. During the same period of time, the IP group will be taught using an instructor. The instructor will provide two demonstrations and explanations of the simple interrupted suture following which the participants will attempt the suture individually on their own skin pads and suturing kit (Modifications will be made by an experienced surgical instructor on our team ST). The instructor will be told to provide feedback and guidance to the participants as well as answer any questions that participants may have. After the initial time, the DD group will be paired with an instructor who will provide two demonstrations and explanations of the suture and then interact with participants as they attempt the suture. The IP group will practice the suture without any further instructor guidance. At the end of the teaching session, all participants will complete a post-test requiring them to complete two simple interrupted sutures. Afterwards participants willing will be interview in short focus-group interviews. This entire session is expected to last 2 hours including consent and setup time. After a 1-week delay, participants will return for Phase 2 for the tests of near- and far transfer. Each group will again be randomly allocated a transfer task. Two transfer tasks will be used in this study: To test Hypothesis 1, (the impact on transfer to future learning), participants will be taught the interrupted vertical mattress suture. To ensure equivalency of design and to prevent biasing in favor of one group, all participants will be taught didactically, which will involve viewing a 15-minute video designed by an expert surgeon on our team (ST) to teach the novel suturing task. Participants will then be given 20-30 minutes to practice the suture following which they will perform two vertical matrass sutures on a typical skin pad. To test Hypothesis 2 (the impact on transfer of learning to a more complex version of the initial task) participants will perform two simple interrupted sutures on a suturing pad representing in an abdominal simulator with the added contextual change of different instruments and suture. In both groups, participants willing, will afterwards be recorded for a 'Think-Aloud' interview, in which they describe their approach to the suturing task out-loud. This phase is expected to last 1.5 hours. PERSPECTIVES: Faculty instructors are a limited resource in formal simulation-based training during post-graduate training. The rise of structured learning activities such as surgical boot camps and the emphasis on greater feedback and support for trainees means that instructor time is at a greater premium than ever before. Instructors must take time away from their busy clinical and workplace-based education activities in order to teach. Not only does this cost the healthcare system, the time commitment can reduce willingness to participate in education. Additional costs may be incurred by programs that must offer financial incentives for instructors. This trade-off between education and clinical work occurs in all academic postgraduate programs. Given the cost and investment required to recruit faculty for training, research is needed to maximize the efficiency of faculty involvement. The investigators work directly contributes to this goal by identifying how instructor guidance is most helpful to trainees. Guided-discovery may be one approach to reducing the cost of training and instructor time in both post-graduate as well as pre-graduate learning courses. Post-graduate training also requires that trainees develop autonomy and are able to learn new skills or concepts effectively (stresses trainees' abilities to transfer their training when faced with uncertainty and or complexity in future scenarios. Guided-discovery may be an effective organizing principle for educational design that can achieve these competencies across a wide range of disciplines and training environments. The investigators proposal would thus establish evidence of efficacy for guided-discovery for these competency roles. More... »

URL

https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT03684720

Related SciGraph Publications

JSON-LD is the canonical representation for SciGraph data.

TIP: You can open this SciGraph record using an external JSON-LD service: JSON-LD Playground Google SDTT

[
  {
    "@context": "https://springernature.github.io/scigraph/jsonld/sgcontext.json", 
    "about": [
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/3268", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }
    ], 
    "description": "The study is a randomized experimental study comparing two forms of learning; guided-discovery-learning and traditional instructional learning. Recruiting sixty-four participants, the investigators plan on comparing these two groups through a procedural skill in the form of suturing. In the case of guided-discovery-learning, the group will be allowed a discovery phase before instruction. In contrast, the control group will receive traditional instruction-lead-learning, in which a teacher teaches the participants a skill, and afterwards the participants practice it. After the teaching session, both groups will undertake a post-test of skill-level. A week later both groups will undertake a test for the execution of the learned suturing skill to a more complex version of the original task (Near-transfer). They will also undergo a test for the ability to transfer their learning to a new skill (i.e. preparation for future learning), in this case a new suture (Far-transfer). By filming these tests and having a blinded expert rater score them, the investigators will be able to get a measurement of attained transfer of skill-level throughout the procedures. The investigators hypothesis is that, the participants in the Guided-discovery-group will have an equal score to that of the traditional-learning group in the ability to obtain a skill and transfer it to a more complex version. Furthermore, the investigators hypothesize that the Guided-discovery-group will score better than the traditional-learning group in the case of transferring the procedural knowledge to learning a new skill. As well as testing the efficacy of guided-discovery-learning on a procedural skill, the investigators wish to investigate how and why it works. By filming a subset of participants in each group, as well as using questionnaires, and focus-group interviews the investigators will explore how participants interact in this different learning-environment compared to the traditional instructional learning-environment.\n\nDetailed Description\nBACKGROUND AND RATIONALE: Technical skills are a core competency in surgical specialties. The level of technical skills is directly linked to patient outcomes and it is an absolute requirement that surgical trainees learn to master basic surgical skills. It is therefore a necessity that medical students also become well equipped with these skills, such as suturing. During the last decade, minimally invasive techniques have made their way to the operating room and improved patient outcomes. Despite these advances it is still necessary for surgeons to master the open surgical skills. Unexpected complication can arise in minimally invasive procedures that require conversion to open access surgery. Furthermore, there are procedures where you cannot use minimally invasive techniques. Because of the extensive use of minimally invasive surgery, it is becoming more difficult for doctors as well as medical students in surgical departments to gain the level of experience needed, to become proficient in open surgical techniques. Pre-clinical teaching and simulation training is a possible solution to this problem For novice learners, simulation training is an opportunity to acquire fundamental skills such as suturing in a safe and high-feedback environment and without the difficulties of acquiring these skills in the workplace. For more advanced trainees, simulation affords the practice of difficult and complex procedures which may be otherwise too unsafe to acquire during patient care. But, merely implementing simulation training is no guarantee of educational utility, and instead thoughtful curricular integration of simulation requires considering the role and purpose of the simulator, the student experience, debriefing, and the intended outcomes to evaluate success. One potential area for optimizing simulation-based training is to clarify instructors' roles when providing guidance and direct supervision. One of the challenges with simulation training is the amount of resources this sort of education requires. Especially the amount of time a student spends interacting with an instructor. Supervision and instruction are key to an effective simulation-based training, and there is mounting evidence, which suggest, that the community needs to reconsider the balance between instruction and discovery, allowing for a good interaction between student and teacher, encouraging learning. Therefore the question is; on what level should simulation-based teaching be instructor-orientated? When teaching technical medical skills, the answer to the question, whether the training should be discovery-orientated or instructor-orientated has been thoroughly researched. Medical Education literature has long moved away from the question of either or, and is now more focused on, in which order discovery- and instruction-teaching should be, to provide the best learning outcome. Recent studies has shown some positive results of guided-discovery-learning, which in its simple form, combines both elements from discovery and instruction-based teaching. Especially the ability to 'transfer' learning seems vastly improved, with this teaching method. Transfer tasks faced by learners exist on spectrum with a common challenge being new problems which are more complex or in new contexts but essentially require replication of previously learned skills, i.e. near transfer. While near transfer can be difficult for learners, even more challenging is transfer that requires they apply their previous skills and understanding to learn new skills or concepts, i.e. far transfer. Guided-discovery learning has been shown to especially positively impact this latter type of transfer task. Thus guided-discovery may promote student-autonomy and self-learning which subsequently enables students to take responsibility for their own future learning. In a pilot-study completed by the investigators research-partners at the Wilson-Centre in Toronto, Canada, they compared groups of discovery followed by direct discovery (DD) with instruction followed by discovery (IP). In the case of DD, the participants, where given the materials needed to complete a simple suture, and a finished suture to look at. After the discovery-phase, they were parred with an instructor who demonstrated how it was to be performed. In the IP-case they were first instructed on how to perform the suture, and were afterwards allowed to practice it. At the end of the course both groups were given a post-test of ability, and a week-later both groups were given a retention test as well as a transfer test. The pilot-study included 26 participants in total, divided in two groups of 13. The participants were randomized, and everything was filmed and scored by blinded raters after an international standard. There were no significant results for the immediate post-test as well as the retention test. But in the case of the transfer test, the DD-group was far superior. The investigators study will expand on the pilot-study to provide a comparison of guided discovery to traditional instruction for the learning of suturing tasks in surgery, seeing if Guided-discovery-learning works in a much larger research group. Using a double randomized, mixed-methods experimental design, the investigators will investigate the effect of discovery followed by direct instruction (DD) vs. instruction followed by practice (IP) for the acquisition and two types of transfer of surgical skills. The investigators hypothesize that: 1. Participants in the DD condition will be better able to transfer their knowledge to learning a new skill (i.e., preparation for future learning). 2. Participants in the DD condition will have equivalent performance to IP on post-test, but a similar or slightly improved performance on transfer of suturing skill to a more complex task (near-transfer). 3. Participants in the DD condition will interact differently with instructors and will use their learnings from the discovery phase to scaffold their learning during the direct instruction phase as well as interacting differently with the task at hand. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The study will be performed at CAMES, including n=64 pre-clinical medical students from the Copenhagen University. The investigators are targeting undergraduate students, rather than surgical residents, because they want novice learners, and they believe it is worthwhile to establish efficacy of the intervention group using simpler tasks which can be feasibly studied. The investigators based their sample size on the previous pilot-study which suggests that detecting a large effect on a global rating scale (Hedges g of >0. with an alpha of 0.05 and power of 80% requires at least 13 participants per group with additional participants recruited for potential loss to follow-up for a total of 16 per group. Participants will receive a certificate showing completed suturing course, as an honorarium to compensate for their time in the study. Part 1 of this study is an experimental design with two phases that will test the efficacy of guided discovery: Phase 1 will be a learning phase with the experimental manipulations, and Phase 2 will take place one week later and be outcome assessment for near- and far transfer. Part 2 of this study will be explorative seeking answers to how and why guided-discovery works. For Phase 1, participants will be enrolled and randomly allocated to either the DD or IP groups. Each group consists of 8 participants. Participants will be randomized and the method of teaching allocated on the date of teaching. This will ensure generalization and ease of statistical analysis. In the DD group, participants will be given an example of a completed simple interrupted suture and their own skin pad, and suturing kit. They will then attempt to replicate the suture using the equipment and their own knowledge over 30 minutes. During the same period of time, the IP group will be taught using an instructor. The instructor will provide two demonstrations and explanations of the simple interrupted suture following which the participants will attempt the suture individually on their own skin pads and suturing kit (Modifications will be made by an experienced surgical instructor on our team ST). The instructor will be told to provide feedback and guidance to the participants as well as answer any questions that participants may have. After the initial time, the DD group will be paired with an instructor who will provide two demonstrations and explanations of the suture and then interact with participants as they attempt the suture. The IP group will practice the suture without any further instructor guidance. At the end of the teaching session, all participants will complete a post-test requiring them to complete two simple interrupted sutures. Afterwards participants willing will be interview in short focus-group interviews. This entire session is expected to last 2 hours including consent and setup time. After a 1-week delay, participants will return for Phase 2 for the tests of near- and far transfer. Each group will again be randomly allocated a transfer task. Two transfer tasks will be used in this study: To test Hypothesis 1, (the impact on transfer to future learning), participants will be taught the interrupted vertical mattress suture. To ensure equivalency of design and to prevent biasing in favor of one group, all participants will be taught didactically, which will involve viewing a 15-minute video designed by an expert surgeon on our team (ST) to teach the novel suturing task. Participants will then be given 20-30 minutes to practice the suture following which they will perform two vertical matrass sutures on a typical skin pad. To test Hypothesis 2 (the impact on transfer of learning to a more complex version of the initial task) participants will perform two simple interrupted sutures on a suturing pad representing in an abdominal simulator with the added contextual change of different instruments and suture. In both groups, participants willing, will afterwards be recorded for a 'Think-Aloud' interview, in which they describe their approach to the suturing task out-loud. This phase is expected to last 1.5 hours. PERSPECTIVES: Faculty instructors are a limited resource in formal simulation-based training during post-graduate training. The rise of structured learning activities such as surgical boot camps and the emphasis on greater feedback and support for trainees means that instructor time is at a greater premium than ever before. Instructors must take time away from their busy clinical and workplace-based education activities in order to teach. Not only does this cost the healthcare system, the time commitment can reduce willingness to participate in education. Additional costs may be incurred by programs that must offer financial incentives for instructors. This trade-off between education and clinical work occurs in all academic postgraduate programs. Given the cost and investment required to recruit faculty for training, research is needed to maximize the efficiency of faculty involvement. The investigators work directly contributes to this goal by identifying how instructor guidance is most helpful to trainees. Guided-discovery may be one approach to reducing the cost of training and instructor time in both post-graduate as well as pre-graduate learning courses. Post-graduate training also requires that trainees develop autonomy and are able to learn new skills or concepts effectively (stresses trainees' abilities to transfer their training when faced with uncertainty and or complexity in future scenarios. Guided-discovery may be an effective organizing principle for educational design that can achieve these competencies across a wide range of disciplines and training environments. The investigators proposal would thus establish evidence of efficacy for guided-discovery for these competency roles.", 
    "endDate": "2020-07-01T00:00:00Z", 
    "id": "sg:clinicaltrial.NCT03684720", 
    "keywords": [
      "Optimize", 
      "maximizes", 
      "surgical simulation", 
      "experimental study", 
      "guided discovery", 
      "recruiting", 
      "skill", 
      "suturing", 
      "discovery phase", 
      "Instructional Film and Video", 
      "contrast", 
      "control group", 
      "traditional instruction", 
      "teacher", 
      "practice", 
      "teaching", 
      "post-test", 
      "skill level", 
      "execution", 
      "complex", 
      "task", 
      "transfer", 
      "preparation", 
      "expert", 
      "measurement", 
      "method", 
      "score", 
      "Learning", 
      "procedural knowledge", 
      "efficacy", 
      "subset", 
      "questionnaire", 
      "interview", 
      "environment", 
      "rationale", 
      "technical skill", 
      "core competency", 
      "surgical specialty", 
      "patient outcome", 
      "absolute requirement", 
      "trainee", 
      "surgical skill", 
      "necessity", 
      "medical student", 
      "last decade", 
      "invasive technique", 
      "room", 
      "improved patient outcome", 
      "surgeon", 
      "complication", 
      "invasive procedure", 
      "conversion", 
      "open access", 
      "extensive use", 
      "invasive surgery", 
      "doctor", 
      "surgical technique", 
      "simulation training", 
      "possible solution", 
      "learner", 
      "fundamental skill", 
      "workplace", 
      "simulation", 
      "complex procedure", 
      "patient care", 
      "guarantee", 
      "utility", 
      "integration", 
      "simulator", 
      "intended outcome", 
      "success", 
      "potential area", 
      "optimizing", 
      "instructor", 
      "guidance", 
      "direct supervision", 
      "challenge", 
      "Health Resource", 
      "sort", 
      "Education", 
      "Organization and Administration", 
      "evidence", 
      "Residence Characteristic", 
      "balance", 
      "discovery", 
      "good", 
      "education literature", 
      "Recent study", 
      "positive result", 
      "simple form", 
      "element", 
      "spectrum", 
      "common challenge", 
      "replication", 
      "concept", 
      "latter type", 
      "autonomy", 
      "responsibility", 
      "pilot", 
      "research partner", 
      "Toronto", 
      "Canada", 
      "IP", 
      "suture", 
      "retention", 
      "everything", 
      "raters", 
      "significant result", 
      "investigator study", 
      "comparison", 
      "General Surgery", 
      "large research group", 
      "mixed method", 
      "direct instruction", 
      "acquisition", 
      "improved performance", 
      "complex task", 
      "scaffold", 
      "hand", 
      "Research Design", 
      "Copenhagen", 
      "undergraduate student", 
      "surgical resident", 
      "intervention group", 
      "simpler", 
      "sample size", 
      "previous pilot study", 
      "large effect", 
      "rating scale", 
      "hedge", 
      "alpha", 
      "power", 
      "additional participant", 
      "potential loss", 
      "certificate", 
      "honorarium", 
      "Part 1", 
      "Phase 1", 
      "experimental manipulation", 
      "Phase 2", 
      "Outcome Assessment", 
      "Part 2", 
      "date", 
      "generalization", 
      "ease", 
      "statistical analysis", 
      "skin", 
      "Equipment and Supply", 
      "own knowledge", 
      "same period", 
      "demonstration", 
      "explanation", 
      "attempt", 
      "modification", 
      "team", 
      "feedback", 
      "initial time", 
      "afterwards", 
      "entire session", 
      "consent", 
      "setup time", 
      "delay", 
      "hypothesis 1", 
      "mattress", 
      "equivalency", 
      "video", 
      "STS", 
      "hypothesis 2", 
      "different instrument", 
      "limited resource", 
      "post-graduate training", 
      "rise", 
      "Boot Camp", 
      "emphasis", 
      "premium", 
      "education activity", 
      "Delivery of Health Care", 
      "time commitment", 
      "willingness", 
      "financial incentive", 
      "trade-off", 
      "clinical work", 
      "postgraduate", 
      "investment", 
      "faculty", 
      "efficiency", 
      "faculty involvement", 
      "investigator work", 
      "graduate", 
      "uncertainty", 
      "complexity", 
      "future scenario", 
      "principle", 
      "competency", 
      "wide range", 
      "discipline", 
      "training environment"
    ], 
    "name": "Using 'Guided-Discovery-Learning' to Optimize and Maximize Transfer of Surgical Simulation", 
    "sameAs": [
      "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/clinical_trial/NCT03684720"
    ], 
    "sdDataset": "clinical_trials", 
    "sdDatePublished": "2019-03-07T15:28", 
    "sdLicense": "https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/", 
    "sdPublisher": {
      "name": "Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project", 
      "type": "Organization"
    }, 
    "sdSource": "file:///pack/app/us_ct_data_00028.json", 
    "sponsor": [
      {
        "id": "https://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.489450.4", 
        "type": "Organization"
      }
    ], 
    "startDate": "2018-10-01T00:00:00Z", 
    "subjectOf": [
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12649", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1002004834"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e3181ed4c96", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1003718527"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmra054785", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1005377263"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.06.009", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1011554012"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12893", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1012833881"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9482", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1022285307"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s10459-015-9593-1", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1029790798", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-015-9593-1"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s10459-015-9593-1", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1029790798", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-015-9593-1"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04268.x", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1035650004"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143833", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1036104608"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e318288c40b", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1040382630"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1097/sih.0000000000000095", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1044571732"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000001138", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1051772885"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/s10459-014-9504-x", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1051908966", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-014-9504-x"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }
    ], 
    "type": "MedicalStudy", 
    "url": "https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT03684720"
  }
]
 

Download the RDF metadata as:  json-ld nt turtle xml License info

HOW TO GET THIS DATA PROGRAMMATICALLY:

JSON-LD is a popular format for linked data which is fully compatible with JSON.

curl -H 'Accept: application/ld+json' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/clinicaltrial.NCT03684720'

N-Triples is a line-based linked data format ideal for batch operations.

curl -H 'Accept: application/n-triples' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/clinicaltrial.NCT03684720'

Turtle is a human-readable linked data format.

curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/clinicaltrial.NCT03684720'

RDF/XML is a standard XML format for linked data.

curl -H 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/clinicaltrial.NCT03684720'


 

This table displays all metadata directly associated to this object as RDF triples.

257 TRIPLES      16 PREDICATES      225 URIs      206 LITERALS      1 BLANK NODES

Subject Predicate Object
1 sg:clinicaltrial.NCT03684720 schema:about anzsrc-for:3268
2 schema:description The study is a randomized experimental study comparing two forms of learning; guided-discovery-learning and traditional instructional learning. Recruiting sixty-four participants, the investigators plan on comparing these two groups through a procedural skill in the form of suturing. In the case of guided-discovery-learning, the group will be allowed a discovery phase before instruction. In contrast, the control group will receive traditional instruction-lead-learning, in which a teacher teaches the participants a skill, and afterwards the participants practice it. After the teaching session, both groups will undertake a post-test of skill-level. A week later both groups will undertake a test for the execution of the learned suturing skill to a more complex version of the original task (Near-transfer). They will also undergo a test for the ability to transfer their learning to a new skill (i.e. preparation for future learning), in this case a new suture (Far-transfer). By filming these tests and having a blinded expert rater score them, the investigators will be able to get a measurement of attained transfer of skill-level throughout the procedures. The investigators hypothesis is that, the participants in the Guided-discovery-group will have an equal score to that of the traditional-learning group in the ability to obtain a skill and transfer it to a more complex version. Furthermore, the investigators hypothesize that the Guided-discovery-group will score better than the traditional-learning group in the case of transferring the procedural knowledge to learning a new skill. As well as testing the efficacy of guided-discovery-learning on a procedural skill, the investigators wish to investigate how and why it works. By filming a subset of participants in each group, as well as using questionnaires, and focus-group interviews the investigators will explore how participants interact in this different learning-environment compared to the traditional instructional learning-environment. Detailed Description BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE: Technical skills are a core competency in surgical specialties. The level of technical skills is directly linked to patient outcomes and it is an absolute requirement that surgical trainees learn to master basic surgical skills. It is therefore a necessity that medical students also become well equipped with these skills, such as suturing. During the last decade, minimally invasive techniques have made their way to the operating room and improved patient outcomes. Despite these advances it is still necessary for surgeons to master the open surgical skills. Unexpected complication can arise in minimally invasive procedures that require conversion to open access surgery. Furthermore, there are procedures where you cannot use minimally invasive techniques. Because of the extensive use of minimally invasive surgery, it is becoming more difficult for doctors as well as medical students in surgical departments to gain the level of experience needed, to become proficient in open surgical techniques. Pre-clinical teaching and simulation training is a possible solution to this problem For novice learners, simulation training is an opportunity to acquire fundamental skills such as suturing in a safe and high-feedback environment and without the difficulties of acquiring these skills in the workplace. For more advanced trainees, simulation affords the practice of difficult and complex procedures which may be otherwise too unsafe to acquire during patient care. But, merely implementing simulation training is no guarantee of educational utility, and instead thoughtful curricular integration of simulation requires considering the role and purpose of the simulator, the student experience, debriefing, and the intended outcomes to evaluate success. One potential area for optimizing simulation-based training is to clarify instructors' roles when providing guidance and direct supervision. One of the challenges with simulation training is the amount of resources this sort of education requires. Especially the amount of time a student spends interacting with an instructor. Supervision and instruction are key to an effective simulation-based training, and there is mounting evidence, which suggest, that the community needs to reconsider the balance between instruction and discovery, allowing for a good interaction between student and teacher, encouraging learning. Therefore the question is; on what level should simulation-based teaching be instructor-orientated? When teaching technical medical skills, the answer to the question, whether the training should be discovery-orientated or instructor-orientated has been thoroughly researched. Medical Education literature has long moved away from the question of either or, and is now more focused on, in which order discovery- and instruction-teaching should be, to provide the best learning outcome. Recent studies has shown some positive results of guided-discovery-learning, which in its simple form, combines both elements from discovery and instruction-based teaching. Especially the ability to 'transfer' learning seems vastly improved, with this teaching method. Transfer tasks faced by learners exist on spectrum with a common challenge being new problems which are more complex or in new contexts but essentially require replication of previously learned skills, i.e. near transfer. While near transfer can be difficult for learners, even more challenging is transfer that requires they apply their previous skills and understanding to learn new skills or concepts, i.e. far transfer. Guided-discovery learning has been shown to especially positively impact this latter type of transfer task. Thus guided-discovery may promote student-autonomy and self-learning which subsequently enables students to take responsibility for their own future learning. In a pilot-study completed by the investigators research-partners at the Wilson-Centre in Toronto, Canada, they compared groups of discovery followed by direct discovery (DD) with instruction followed by discovery (IP). In the case of DD, the participants, where given the materials needed to complete a simple suture, and a finished suture to look at. After the discovery-phase, they were parred with an instructor who demonstrated how it was to be performed. In the IP-case they were first instructed on how to perform the suture, and were afterwards allowed to practice it. At the end of the course both groups were given a post-test of ability, and a week-later both groups were given a retention test as well as a transfer test. The pilot-study included 26 participants in total, divided in two groups of 13. The participants were randomized, and everything was filmed and scored by blinded raters after an international standard. There were no significant results for the immediate post-test as well as the retention test. But in the case of the transfer test, the DD-group was far superior. The investigators study will expand on the pilot-study to provide a comparison of guided discovery to traditional instruction for the learning of suturing tasks in surgery, seeing if Guided-discovery-learning works in a much larger research group. Using a double randomized, mixed-methods experimental design, the investigators will investigate the effect of discovery followed by direct instruction (DD) vs. instruction followed by practice (IP) for the acquisition and two types of transfer of surgical skills. The investigators hypothesize that: 1. Participants in the DD condition will be better able to transfer their knowledge to learning a new skill (i.e., preparation for future learning). 2. Participants in the DD condition will have equivalent performance to IP on post-test, but a similar or slightly improved performance on transfer of suturing skill to a more complex task (near-transfer). 3. Participants in the DD condition will interact differently with instructors and will use their learnings from the discovery phase to scaffold their learning during the direct instruction phase as well as interacting differently with the task at hand. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The study will be performed at CAMES, including n=64 pre-clinical medical students from the Copenhagen University. The investigators are targeting undergraduate students, rather than surgical residents, because they want novice learners, and they believe it is worthwhile to establish efficacy of the intervention group using simpler tasks which can be feasibly studied. The investigators based their sample size on the previous pilot-study which suggests that detecting a large effect on a global rating scale (Hedges g of >0. with an alpha of 0.05 and power of 80% requires at least 13 participants per group with additional participants recruited for potential loss to follow-up for a total of 16 per group. Participants will receive a certificate showing completed suturing course, as an honorarium to compensate for their time in the study. Part 1 of this study is an experimental design with two phases that will test the efficacy of guided discovery: Phase 1 will be a learning phase with the experimental manipulations, and Phase 2 will take place one week later and be outcome assessment for near- and far transfer. Part 2 of this study will be explorative seeking answers to how and why guided-discovery works. For Phase 1, participants will be enrolled and randomly allocated to either the DD or IP groups. Each group consists of 8 participants. Participants will be randomized and the method of teaching allocated on the date of teaching. This will ensure generalization and ease of statistical analysis. In the DD group, participants will be given an example of a completed simple interrupted suture and their own skin pad, and suturing kit. They will then attempt to replicate the suture using the equipment and their own knowledge over 30 minutes. During the same period of time, the IP group will be taught using an instructor. The instructor will provide two demonstrations and explanations of the simple interrupted suture following which the participants will attempt the suture individually on their own skin pads and suturing kit (Modifications will be made by an experienced surgical instructor on our team ST). The instructor will be told to provide feedback and guidance to the participants as well as answer any questions that participants may have. After the initial time, the DD group will be paired with an instructor who will provide two demonstrations and explanations of the suture and then interact with participants as they attempt the suture. The IP group will practice the suture without any further instructor guidance. At the end of the teaching session, all participants will complete a post-test requiring them to complete two simple interrupted sutures. Afterwards participants willing will be interview in short focus-group interviews. This entire session is expected to last 2 hours including consent and setup time. After a 1-week delay, participants will return for Phase 2 for the tests of near- and far transfer. Each group will again be randomly allocated a transfer task. Two transfer tasks will be used in this study: To test Hypothesis 1, (the impact on transfer to future learning), participants will be taught the interrupted vertical mattress suture. To ensure equivalency of design and to prevent biasing in favor of one group, all participants will be taught didactically, which will involve viewing a 15-minute video designed by an expert surgeon on our team (ST) to teach the novel suturing task. Participants will then be given 20-30 minutes to practice the suture following which they will perform two vertical matrass sutures on a typical skin pad. To test Hypothesis 2 (the impact on transfer of learning to a more complex version of the initial task) participants will perform two simple interrupted sutures on a suturing pad representing in an abdominal simulator with the added contextual change of different instruments and suture. In both groups, participants willing, will afterwards be recorded for a 'Think-Aloud' interview, in which they describe their approach to the suturing task out-loud. This phase is expected to last 1.5 hours. PERSPECTIVES: Faculty instructors are a limited resource in formal simulation-based training during post-graduate training. The rise of structured learning activities such as surgical boot camps and the emphasis on greater feedback and support for trainees means that instructor time is at a greater premium than ever before. Instructors must take time away from their busy clinical and workplace-based education activities in order to teach. Not only does this cost the healthcare system, the time commitment can reduce willingness to participate in education. Additional costs may be incurred by programs that must offer financial incentives for instructors. This trade-off between education and clinical work occurs in all academic postgraduate programs. Given the cost and investment required to recruit faculty for training, research is needed to maximize the efficiency of faculty involvement. The investigators work directly contributes to this goal by identifying how instructor guidance is most helpful to trainees. Guided-discovery may be one approach to reducing the cost of training and instructor time in both post-graduate as well as pre-graduate learning courses. Post-graduate training also requires that trainees develop autonomy and are able to learn new skills or concepts effectively (stresses trainees' abilities to transfer their training when faced with uncertainty and or complexity in future scenarios. Guided-discovery may be an effective organizing principle for educational design that can achieve these competencies across a wide range of disciplines and training environments. The investigators proposal would thus establish evidence of efficacy for guided-discovery for these competency roles.
3 schema:endDate 2020-07-01T00:00:00Z
4 schema:keywords Boot Camp
5 Canada
6 Copenhagen
7 Delivery of Health Care
8 Education
9 Equipment and Supply
10 General Surgery
11 Health Resource
12 IP
13 Instructional Film and Video
14 Learning
15 Optimize
16 Organization and Administration
17 Outcome Assessment
18 Part 1
19 Part 2
20 Phase 1
21 Phase 2
22 Recent study
23 Research Design
24 Residence Characteristic
25 STS
26 Toronto
27 absolute requirement
28 acquisition
29 additional participant
30 afterwards
31 alpha
32 attempt
33 autonomy
34 balance
35 certificate
36 challenge
37 clinical work
38 common challenge
39 comparison
40 competency
41 complex
42 complex procedure
43 complex task
44 complexity
45 complication
46 concept
47 consent
48 contrast
49 control group
50 conversion
51 core competency
52 date
53 delay
54 demonstration
55 different instrument
56 direct instruction
57 direct supervision
58 discipline
59 discovery
60 discovery phase
61 doctor
62 ease
63 education activity
64 education literature
65 efficacy
66 efficiency
67 element
68 emphasis
69 entire session
70 environment
71 equivalency
72 everything
73 evidence
74 execution
75 experimental manipulation
76 experimental study
77 expert
78 explanation
79 extensive use
80 faculty
81 faculty involvement
82 feedback
83 financial incentive
84 fundamental skill
85 future scenario
86 generalization
87 good
88 graduate
89 guarantee
90 guidance
91 guided discovery
92 hand
93 hedge
94 honorarium
95 hypothesis 1
96 hypothesis 2
97 improved patient outcome
98 improved performance
99 initial time
100 instructor
101 integration
102 intended outcome
103 intervention group
104 interview
105 invasive procedure
106 invasive surgery
107 invasive technique
108 investigator study
109 investigator work
110 investment
111 large effect
112 large research group
113 last decade
114 latter type
115 learner
116 limited resource
117 mattress
118 maximizes
119 measurement
120 medical student
121 method
122 mixed method
123 modification
124 necessity
125 open access
126 optimizing
127 own knowledge
128 patient care
129 patient outcome
130 pilot
131 positive result
132 possible solution
133 post-graduate training
134 post-test
135 postgraduate
136 potential area
137 potential loss
138 power
139 practice
140 premium
141 preparation
142 previous pilot study
143 principle
144 procedural knowledge
145 questionnaire
146 raters
147 rating scale
148 rationale
149 recruiting
150 replication
151 research partner
152 responsibility
153 retention
154 rise
155 room
156 same period
157 sample size
158 scaffold
159 score
160 setup time
161 significant result
162 simple form
163 simpler
164 simulation
165 simulation training
166 simulator
167 skill
168 skill level
169 skin
170 sort
171 spectrum
172 statistical analysis
173 subset
174 success
175 surgeon
176 surgical resident
177 surgical simulation
178 surgical skill
179 surgical specialty
180 surgical technique
181 suture
182 suturing
183 task
184 teacher
185 teaching
186 team
187 technical skill
188 time commitment
189 trade-off
190 traditional instruction
191 trainee
192 training environment
193 transfer
194 uncertainty
195 undergraduate student
196 utility
197 video
198 wide range
199 willingness
200 workplace
201 schema:name Using 'Guided-Discovery-Learning' to Optimize and Maximize Transfer of Surgical Simulation
202 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/clinical_trial/NCT03684720
203 schema:sdDatePublished 2019-03-07T15:28
204 schema:sdLicense https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/
205 schema:sdPublisher Nb909ade4bc844f3cadc3566aa065c49e
206 schema:sponsor https://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.489450.4
207 schema:startDate 2018-10-01T00:00:00Z
208 schema:subjectOf sg:pub.10.1007/s10459-014-9504-x
209 sg:pub.10.1007/s10459-015-9593-1
210 https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9482
211 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.06.009
212 https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmra054785
213 https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e3181ed4c96
214 https://doi.org/10.1097/sih.0000000000000095
215 https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000001138
216 https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e318288c40b
217 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04268.x
218 https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12649
219 https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12893
220 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143833
221 schema:url https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT03684720
222 sgo:license sg:explorer/license/
223 sgo:sdDataset clinical_trials
224 rdf:type schema:MedicalStudy
225 Nb909ade4bc844f3cadc3566aa065c49e schema:name Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project
226 rdf:type schema:Organization
227 anzsrc-for:3268 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
228 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
229 sg:pub.10.1007/s10459-014-9504-x schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1051908966
230 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-014-9504-x
231 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
232 sg:pub.10.1007/s10459-015-9593-1 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1029790798
233 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-015-9593-1
234 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
235 https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9482 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1022285307
236 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
237 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.06.009 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1011554012
238 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
239 https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmra054785 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1005377263
240 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
241 https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e3181ed4c96 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1003718527
242 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
243 https://doi.org/10.1097/sih.0000000000000095 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1044571732
244 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
245 https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000001138 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1051772885
246 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
247 https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e318288c40b schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1040382630
248 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
249 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04268.x schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1035650004
250 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
251 https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12649 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1002004834
252 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
253 https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12893 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1012833881
254 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
255 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143833 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1036104608
256 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
257 https://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.489450.4 schema:Organization
 




Preview window. Press ESC to close (or click here)


...