{"title":"Item-Level Scoring Profiles and Technical Domains in the Colorectal Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification Examination","authors":"Suguru Hasegawa, Hiroya Kuroyanagi, Junichiro Kawamura, Yusuke Kinugasa, Kazutaka Obama, Yuko Kitagawa","doi":"10.1111/ases.70389","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>\n <span>Video-based assessment is increasingly used to evaluate operative performance, but pass–fail outcomes alone provide limited information on the technical components associated with the decision. This study aimed to clarify item-level scoring patterns and latent technical domains underlying pass–fail decisions in the colorectal Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification examination.</span>\n </p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p><span>This secondary item-level analysis used the colorectal ESSQS examination dataset of the Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery from 2020 to 2024. The final application-level pass–fail decision was the primary outcome, and each primary reviewer evaluation was the unit of analysis. Item scores were standardized as proportions of the version-specific maximum. Univariable logistic regression, multivariable generalized linear mixed-effects models, and exploratory factor analysis were performed</span>.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>\n <span>A total of 1945 applications yielded 3890 reviewer-level observations, with a final pass rate of 33.2%. Items related to operative field exposure, cooperation with assistants, dissection-plane recognition, workflow planning, vascular control, and transection/anastomosis were most strongly associated with the outcome. Exploratory factor analysis identified seven clinically interpretable domains; operative field exposure and team coordination, dissection-plane recognition, vessel management and lymphadenectomy, and transection/anastomosis were most strongly associated with the final decision.</span>\n </p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p><span>Pass–fail decisions in the colorectal ESSQS examination were characterized by both general endoscopic competencies and colorectal procedure-specific technical components. Item- and domain-level</span> <span>analyses describe the internal structure of the rubric; application to individualized feedback would require improved inter-reviewer reliability and further validation, and the findings may inform reviewer calibration and refinement of video-based skill assessment.</span></p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47019,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ases.70389","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Video-based assessment is increasingly used to evaluate operative performance, but pass–fail outcomes alone provide limited information on the technical components associated with the decision. This study aimed to clarify item-level scoring patterns and latent technical domains underlying pass–fail decisions in the colorectal Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification examination.
Methods
This secondary item-level analysis used the colorectal ESSQS examination dataset of the Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery from 2020 to 2024. The final application-level pass–fail decision was the primary outcome, and each primary reviewer evaluation was the unit of analysis. Item scores were standardized as proportions of the version-specific maximum. Univariable logistic regression, multivariable generalized linear mixed-effects models, and exploratory factor analysis were performed.
Results
A total of 1945 applications yielded 3890 reviewer-level observations, with a final pass rate of 33.2%. Items related to operative field exposure, cooperation with assistants, dissection-plane recognition, workflow planning, vascular control, and transection/anastomosis were most strongly associated with the outcome. Exploratory factor analysis identified seven clinically interpretable domains; operative field exposure and team coordination, dissection-plane recognition, vessel management and lymphadenectomy, and transection/anastomosis were most strongly associated with the final decision.
Conclusions
Pass–fail decisions in the colorectal ESSQS examination were characterized by both general endoscopic competencies and colorectal procedure-specific technical components. Item- and domain-levelanalyses describe the internal structure of the rubric; application to individualized feedback would require improved inter-reviewer reliability and further validation, and the findings may inform reviewer calibration and refinement of video-based skill assessment.