C.S. Swain , H.M.L. Cohen , G. Helgesson , R.F. Rickard , K. Karlgren
{"title":"Exploring the Scientific Conversation Regarding Live Tissue Training in Trauma Surgery: A Bibliometric Analysis","authors":"C.S. Swain , H.M.L. Cohen , G. Helgesson , R.F. Rickard , K. Karlgren","doi":"10.1016/j.jsurg.2024.09.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>INTRODUCTION</h3><div>Live tissue training (LTT), use of a living anaesthetized animal to practice surgical skills, is a continuing practice, despite controversy and ethical concern. The scientific literature appears polarized in terms of supporting or refuting the practice. This bibliometric analysis of the literature maps and explores the academic conversation regarding LTT including potential influences associated with authorship.</div></div><div><h3>METHOD</h3><div>Literature identified via the process conducted during a previously published systematic review was used for analysis. 84 literature sources were included. Bibliometric data were manually extracted for analysis, and visually mapped.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS</h3><div>The scientific conversation about LTT use in trauma is centered on surgery, trauma and emergency medicine specialties, published in clinical journals, with significant influence noted from military authors and organizations. Few authors published work in simulation or education-based journals. Publications are considered to be generally supportive of, or ambivalent to, the use of LTT; those with notable objections to LTT tended to be affiliated to animal activist organizations.</div></div><div><h3>CONCLUSION</h3><div>There is academic conversation apparent within the literature, in the form of citations, although this is used to affirm or rebuke a given perspective, rather than engage with, or learn from, the content. There is potential benefit to increased interactivity between researchers. The conversation could also be informed by authors broadening the outlook to wider medical educational literature and other disciplines, rather than focusing on application to clinical training, to improve trauma education for all, regardless of modality.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50033,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Education","volume":"81 12","pages":"Article 103295"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1931720424004331","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
INTRODUCTION
Live tissue training (LTT), use of a living anaesthetized animal to practice surgical skills, is a continuing practice, despite controversy and ethical concern. The scientific literature appears polarized in terms of supporting or refuting the practice. This bibliometric analysis of the literature maps and explores the academic conversation regarding LTT including potential influences associated with authorship.
METHOD
Literature identified via the process conducted during a previously published systematic review was used for analysis. 84 literature sources were included. Bibliometric data were manually extracted for analysis, and visually mapped.
RESULTS
The scientific conversation about LTT use in trauma is centered on surgery, trauma and emergency medicine specialties, published in clinical journals, with significant influence noted from military authors and organizations. Few authors published work in simulation or education-based journals. Publications are considered to be generally supportive of, or ambivalent to, the use of LTT; those with notable objections to LTT tended to be affiliated to animal activist organizations.
CONCLUSION
There is academic conversation apparent within the literature, in the form of citations, although this is used to affirm or rebuke a given perspective, rather than engage with, or learn from, the content. There is potential benefit to increased interactivity between researchers. The conversation could also be informed by authors broadening the outlook to wider medical educational literature and other disciplines, rather than focusing on application to clinical training, to improve trauma education for all, regardless of modality.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Surgical Education (JSE) is dedicated to advancing the field of surgical education through original research. The journal publishes research articles in all surgical disciplines on topics relative to the education of surgical students, residents, and fellows, as well as practicing surgeons. Our readers look to JSE for timely, innovative research findings from the international surgical education community. As the official journal of the Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS), JSE publishes the proceedings of the annual APDS meeting held during Surgery Education Week.