Author
Listed:
- Natalie Pawlak
- Christine Dart
- Hernan Sacoto Aguilar
- Emmanuel Ameh
- Abebe Bekele
- Maria F Jimenez
- Kokila Lakhoo
- Doruk Ozgediz
- Nobhojit Roy
- Girma Terfera
- Adesoji O Ademuyiwa
- Barnabas Tobi Alayande
- Nivaldo Alonso
- Geoffrey A Anderson
- Stanley N C Anyanwu
- Alazar Berhe Aregawi
- Soham Bandyopadhyay
- Tahmina Banu
- Alemayehu Ginbo Bedada
- Anteneh Gadisa Belachew
- Fabio Botelho
- Emmanuel Bua
- Leticia Nunes Campos
- Chris Dodgion
- Michalina Drejza
- Marcel E Durieux
- Rohini Dutta
- Sarnai Erdene
- Rodrigo Vaz Ferreira
- Zipporah Gathuya
- Dhruva Ghosh
- Randeep Singh Jawa
- Walter D Johnson
- Fauzia Anis Khan
- Fanny Jamileth Navas Leon
- Kristin L Long
- Jana B A Macleod
- Anshul Mahajan
- Rebecca G Maine
- Grace Zurielle C Malolos
- Craig D McClain
- Mary T Nabukenya
- Peter M Nthumba
- Benedict C Nwomeh
- Daniel Kinyuru Ojuka
- Norgrove Penny
- Martha A Quiodettis
- Jennifer Rickard
- Lina Roa
- Lucas Sousa Salgado
- Lubna Samad
- Justina Onyioza Seyi-Olajide
- Martin Smith
- Nichole Starr
- Richard J Stewart
- John L Tarpley
- Julio L Trostchansky
- Ivan Trostchansky
- Thomas G Weiser
- Adili Wobenjo
- Elliot Wollner
- Sudha Jayaraman
Abstract
Academic global surgery is a rapidly growing field that aims to improve access to safe surgical care worldwide. However, no universally accepted competencies exist to inform this developing field. A consensus-based approach, with input from a diverse group of experts, is needed to identify essential competencies that will lead to standardization in this field. A task force was set up using snowball sampling to recruit a broad group of content and context experts in global surgical and perioperative care. A draft set of competencies was revised through the modified Delphi process with two rounds of anonymous input. A threshold of 80% consensus was used to determine whether a competency or sub-competency learning objective was relevant to the skillset needed within academic global surgery and perioperative care. A diverse task force recruited experts from 22 countries to participate in both rounds of the Delphi process. Of the n = 59 respondents completing both rounds of iterative polling, 63% were from low- or middle-income countries. After two rounds of anonymous feedback, participants reached consensus on nine core competencies and 31 sub-competency objectives. The greatest consensus pertained to competency in ethics and professionalism in global surgery (100%) with emphasis on justice, equity, and decolonization across multiple competencies. This Delphi process, with input from experts worldwide, identified nine competencies which can be used to develop standardized academic global surgery and perioperative care curricula worldwide. Further work needs to be done to validate these competencies and establish assessments to ensure that they are taught effectively.
Suggested Citation
Natalie Pawlak & Christine Dart & Hernan Sacoto Aguilar & Emmanuel Ameh & Abebe Bekele & Maria F Jimenez & Kokila Lakhoo & Doruk Ozgediz & Nobhojit Roy & Girma Terfera & Adesoji O Ademuyiwa & Barnabas, 2023.
"Academic global surgical competencies: A modified Delphi consensus study,"
PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(7), pages 1-16, July.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pgph00:0002102
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0002102
Download full text from publisher
Most related items
These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0002102. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.