Clinical Performance Metrics Validity
Cross-source consensus on Clinical Performance Metrics Validity from 1 sources and 4 claims.
1 sources · 4 claims
How it works
Comparisons
Background
Evidence quality
Highlighted claims
- Experienced bronchoscopists significantly outperformed intermediates on DC80, SP80, and procedure efficiency80, but not on raw procedure time. — Simulation-based training intervention using artificial intelligence to improve clinical bronchoscopy performance: a pre–postintervention study
- DC80, SP80, and procedure efficiency80 all correlate significantly with one another, providing evidence of internal structural validity. — Simulation-based training intervention using artificial intelligence to improve clinical bronchoscopy performance: a pre–postintervention study
- This is the first study to establish validity evidence for DC80, SP80, and procedure efficiency80 as clinical (not merely simulation-based) performance metrics, assessed across all applicable aspects of Messick's framework. — Simulation-based training intervention using artificial intelligence to improve clinical bronchoscopy performance: a pre–postintervention study
- No clinical pass-fail standards for bronchoscopy performance have been established yet; consensus statements and further study are required. — Simulation-based training intervention using artificial intelligence to improve clinical bronchoscopy performance: a pre–postintervention study