Citation: Cureus. 2022, 14(11), e31881
Author: Thomas Hughes, Joseph T Fennelly, Rakesh Patel, Jonathan Baxter
Abstract: In recent years, surgical trainees have been exposed to a lower volume of operative procedures. In part, this is due to the reduction in working hours and further disruption by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Much has been done to develop the techniques of surgical skill training outside of the operating theatre. Simulation-based interventions must undergo a process of validation to assess their appropriateness and effectiveness for use in training. The terminology of validation within current literature, however, has not evolved in line with the education community, resulting in varying definitions for the same phrase across domains. This can result in confusion and misinterpretation among researchers and surgeons working within this domain. This technical report describes the "types of validity" definitions used in the traditional framework of surgical simulation literature and the contemporary, unitary framework of validity adopted by educationalist theorists. There is a clear overlap between the traditional "types of validity" and the contemporary, unitary framework. The divergence in the use of those definitions seems, at least partly, influenced by the context of the investigations being conducted. By utilising the contemporary definitions, authors may have struggled to provide the evidence required to justify the use of the multitude of surgical skill simulators developed in the recent past. This report has provided an overview of the current terminology within the validation frameworks and can be used as a reference for future surgical simulation research.
Keywords: simulation education; simulation in medical education; surgical training; terminology; validation.
Thursday 2 February 2023
WUTH publication: The Validation of Surgical Simulators: A Technical Report on Current Validation Terminology as a Reference for Future Research
