同行评议文献中临床干预录像的利用、应用和质量:范围审查。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
European Surgical Research Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-20 DOI:10.1159/000545224
Henry Douglas Robb, Michael G Fadel, Bibek Das, Laith Omar Khalaf Alghazawi, Olivia Ariarasa, Aksaan Arif, Ayda Alizadeh, Zohaib Arain, Matyas Fehervari, Hutan Ashrafian
{"title":"同行评议文献中临床干预录像的利用、应用和质量:范围审查。","authors":"Henry Douglas Robb, Michael G Fadel, Bibek Das, Laith Omar Khalaf Alghazawi, Olivia Ariarasa, Aksaan Arif, Ayda Alizadeh, Zohaib Arain, Matyas Fehervari, Hutan Ashrafian","doi":"10.1159/000545224","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Videos of clinical interventions (VoCIs) demonstrating surgical and interventional procedures have become a mainstay in clinical practice and peer-reviewed academic literature. Despite the widespread availability of VoCI in the literature, there remain no established guidelines regarding the reporting of VoCI. We undertook a scoping review to investigate the current utilisation, application, and quality in VoCI reporting.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>A comprehensive literature search of Medline, Embase, Emcare, and CINAHL databases was performed to retrieve articles presenting VoCI, from January 2020 to December 2023. A customised data extraction tool assessed video characteristics (e.g., case presentation, outcomes), utility (e.g., target audience, reproducibility of procedure), and quality (subjective and objective). A total of 624 VoCIs were included (mean length 06:06), with over 62 h of VoCI reviewed. The most common VoCI perspectives were endoscopic (n = 153; 25%) and laparoscopic (n = 140; 22%). The clinical background and outcomes were described in 480 (76.9%) and 403 cases (64.6%), respectively, with disclosures (n = 23; 3.8%) rarely presented. VoCI primarily targeted trainees (n = 547; 87.7%) with most videos providing technical guidance (n = 394; 63.1%). In total, 248 videos (40%) were rated as medium or low quality on subjective assessment.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>There are significant heterogeneity and notably poor-quality control in VoCI reporting in peer-reviewed literature resulting in the omission of critical procedural steps and suboptimal visual quality. VoCI reporting guidelines are therefore urgently required to provide a set of minimum items that should be reported by clinicians when uploading VoCI.</p>","PeriodicalId":12222,"journal":{"name":"European Surgical Research","volume":" ","pages":"18-31"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Utilisation, Application, and Quality of Videos of Clinical Interventions in Peer-Reviewed Literature: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Henry Douglas Robb, Michael G Fadel, Bibek Das, Laith Omar Khalaf Alghazawi, Olivia Ariarasa, Aksaan Arif, Ayda Alizadeh, Zohaib Arain, Matyas Fehervari, Hutan Ashrafian\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000545224\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Videos of clinical interventions (VoCIs) demonstrating surgical and interventional procedures have become a mainstay in clinical practice and peer-reviewed academic literature. Despite the widespread availability of VoCI in the literature, there remain no established guidelines regarding the reporting of VoCI. We undertook a scoping review to investigate the current utilisation, application, and quality in VoCI reporting.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>A comprehensive literature search of Medline, Embase, Emcare, and CINAHL databases was performed to retrieve articles presenting VoCI, from January 2020 to December 2023. A customised data extraction tool assessed video characteristics (e.g., case presentation, outcomes), utility (e.g., target audience, reproducibility of procedure), and quality (subjective and objective). A total of 624 VoCIs were included (mean length 06:06), with over 62 h of VoCI reviewed. The most common VoCI perspectives were endoscopic (n = 153; 25%) and laparoscopic (n = 140; 22%). The clinical background and outcomes were described in 480 (76.9%) and 403 cases (64.6%), respectively, with disclosures (n = 23; 3.8%) rarely presented. VoCI primarily targeted trainees (n = 547; 87.7%) with most videos providing technical guidance (n = 394; 63.1%). In total, 248 videos (40%) were rated as medium or low quality on subjective assessment.</p><p><strong>Key messages: </strong>There are significant heterogeneity and notably poor-quality control in VoCI reporting in peer-reviewed literature resulting in the omission of critical procedural steps and suboptimal visual quality. VoCI reporting guidelines are therefore urgently required to provide a set of minimum items that should be reported by clinicians when uploading VoCI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12222,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Surgical Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"18-31\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Surgical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000545224\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Surgical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000545224","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:临床干预录像(VoCI)显示外科和介入手术已经成为临床实践和同行评议的学术文献的支柱。尽管VoCI在文献中广泛存在,但关于VoCI的报告仍然没有既定的指导方针。我们进行了范围审查,以调查VoCI报告的当前利用率、应用和质量。方法:对MEDLINE、EMBASE、Emcare和CINAHL数据库进行综合文献检索,检索2020年1月至2023年12月期间出现VoCI的文章。一个定制的数据提取工具评估了视频特征(例如案例呈现、结果)、效用(例如目标受众、程序的可重复性)和质量(主观和客观)。结果:共纳入624份VoCI(平均长度06:06),回顾了超过62小时的VoCI。最常见的VoCI视角是内窥镜(n = 153;25%)和腹腔镜(n = 140;22%)。对480例(76.9%)和403例(64.6%)的临床背景和结果进行了描述,并进行了披露(n = 23;3.8%)很少出现。VoCI主要针对受训人员(n = 547;87.7%),大多数视频提供技术指导(n = 394;63.1%)。248个视频(40%)在主观评价中被评为中等或低质量。结论:同行评议文献中VoCI报告存在显著的异质性和较差的质量控制,导致关键程序步骤的遗漏和视觉质量次优。因此,迫切需要VoCI报告指南提供一套临床医生在上传VoCI时应该报告的最低项目。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Utilisation, Application, and Quality of Videos of Clinical Interventions in Peer-Reviewed Literature: A Scoping Review.

Background: Videos of clinical interventions (VoCIs) demonstrating surgical and interventional procedures have become a mainstay in clinical practice and peer-reviewed academic literature. Despite the widespread availability of VoCI in the literature, there remain no established guidelines regarding the reporting of VoCI. We undertook a scoping review to investigate the current utilisation, application, and quality in VoCI reporting.

Summary: A comprehensive literature search of Medline, Embase, Emcare, and CINAHL databases was performed to retrieve articles presenting VoCI, from January 2020 to December 2023. A customised data extraction tool assessed video characteristics (e.g., case presentation, outcomes), utility (e.g., target audience, reproducibility of procedure), and quality (subjective and objective). A total of 624 VoCIs were included (mean length 06:06), with over 62 h of VoCI reviewed. The most common VoCI perspectives were endoscopic (n = 153; 25%) and laparoscopic (n = 140; 22%). The clinical background and outcomes were described in 480 (76.9%) and 403 cases (64.6%), respectively, with disclosures (n = 23; 3.8%) rarely presented. VoCI primarily targeted trainees (n = 547; 87.7%) with most videos providing technical guidance (n = 394; 63.1%). In total, 248 videos (40%) were rated as medium or low quality on subjective assessment.

Key messages: There are significant heterogeneity and notably poor-quality control in VoCI reporting in peer-reviewed literature resulting in the omission of critical procedural steps and suboptimal visual quality. VoCI reporting guidelines are therefore urgently required to provide a set of minimum items that should be reported by clinicians when uploading VoCI.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
31
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''European Surgical Research'' features original clinical and experimental papers, condensed reviews of new knowledge relevant to surgical research, and short technical notes serving the information needs of investigators in various fields of operative medicine. Coverage includes surgery, surgical pathophysiology, drug usage, and new surgical techniques. Special consideration is given to information on the use of animal models, physiological and biological methods as well as biophysical measuring and recording systems. The journal is of particular value for workers interested in pathophysiologic concepts, new techniques and in how these can be introduced into clinical work or applied when critical decisions are made concerning the use of new procedures or drugs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信