A pilot study of orthopaedic resident self-assessment using a milestones' survey just prior to milestones implementation.

OBJECTIVE: To pilot test if Orthopaedic Surgery residents could self-assess their performance using newly created milestones, as defined by the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education. METHODS: In June 2012, an email was sent to Program Directors and administrative coordinators of the 154 accredited Orthopaedic Surgery Programs, asking them to send their residents a link to an online survey. The survey was adapted from the Orthopaedic Surgery Milestone Project. Completed surveys were aggregated in an anonymous, confidential database. SAS 9.3 was used to perform the analyses. RESULTS: Responses from 71 residents were analyzed. First and second year residents indicated through self-assessment that they had substantially achieved Level 1 and Level 2 milestones. Third year residents reported they had substantially achieved 30/41, and fourth year residents, all Level 3 milestones. Fifth year, graduating residents, reported they had substantially achieved 17 Level 4 milestones, and were extremely close on another 15. No milestone was rated at Level 5, the maximum possible. Earlier in training, Patient Care and Medical Knowledge milestones were rated lower than the milestones reflecting the other four competencies of Practice Based Learning and Improvement, Systems Based Practice, Professionalism, and Interpersonal Communication. The gap was closed by the fourth year. CONCLUSIONS: Residents were able to successfully self-assess using the 41 Orthopaedic Surgery milestones. Respondents' rate improved proficiency over time. Graduating residents report they have substantially, or close to substantially, achieved all Level 4 milestones. Milestone self-assessment may be a useful tool as one component of a program's overall performance assessment strategy.

Knowledge Modeling for The Outcome of Brain Stereotactic Radiosurgery

Purpose: To build a model that will predict the survival time for patients that were treated with stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases using support vector machine (SVM) regression.

Methods and Materials: This study utilized data from 481 patients, which were equally divided into training and validation datasets randomly. The SVM model used a Gaussian RBF function, along with various parameters, such as the size of the epsilon insensitive region and the cost parameter (C) that are used to control the amount of error tolerated by the model. The predictor variables for the SVM model consisted of the actual survival time of the patient, the number of brain metastases, the graded prognostic assessment (GPA) and Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) scores, prescription dose, and the largest planning target volume (PTV). The response of the model is the survival time of the patient. The resulting survival time predictions were analyzed against the actual survival times by single parameter classification and two-parameter classification. The predicted mean survival times within each classification were compared with the actual values to obtain the confidence interval associated with the model’s predictions. In addition to visualizing the data on plots using the means and error bars, the correlation coefficients between the actual and predicted means of the survival times were calculated during each step of the classification.

Results: The number of metastases and KPS scores, were consistently shown to be the strongest predictors in the single parameter classification, and were subsequently used as first classifiers in the two-parameter classification. When the survival times were analyzed with the number of metastases as the first classifier, the best correlation was obtained for patients with 3 metastases, while patients with 4 or 5 metastases had significantly worse results. When the KPS score was used as the first classifier, patients with a KPS score of 60 and 90/100 had similar strong correlation results. These mixed results are likely due to the limited data available for patients with more than 3 metastases or KPS scores of 60 or less.

Conclusions: The number of metastases and the KPS score both showed to be strong predictors of patient survival time. The model was less accurate for patients with more metastases and certain KPS scores due to the lack of training data.

Men's knowledge and attitudes about cervical cancer screening in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: A number of studies have identified male involvement as an important factor affecting reproductive health outcomes, particularly in the areas of family planning, antenatal care, and HIV care. As access to cervical cancer screening programs improves in resource-poor settings, particularly through the integration of HIV and cervical cancer services, it is important to understand the role of male partner support in women's utilization of screening and treatment. METHODS: We administered an oral survey to 110 men in Western Kenya about their knowledge and attitudes regarding cervical cancer and cervical cancer screening. Men who had female partners eligible for cervical cancer screening were recruited from government health facilities where screening was offered free of charge. RESULTS: Specific knowledge about cervical cancer risk factors, prevention, and treatment was low. Only half of the men perceived their partners to be at risk for cervical cancer, and many reported that a positive screen would be emotionally upsetting. Nevertheless, all participants said they would encourage their partners to get screened. CONCLUSIONS: Future interventions should tailor cervical cancer educational opportunities towards men. Further research is needed among both men and couples to better understand barriers to male support for screening and treatment and to determine how to best involve men in cervical cancer prevention efforts.