• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
The Association for Surgical Education

The Association for Surgical Education

Impacting Surgical Education Globally

  • About
    • By-Laws
    • Contact the ASE
    • Leadership
    • Past Presidents
    • Standing Committees
    • Global Surgical Education-Journal of the ASE
    • ASE Strategic Plan 2023-2026
  • Join!
  • Meeting
    • Annual Meeting Information
    • ASE Fall Meeting & Courses
    • Call For Abstracts
      • Scientific Sessions
      • Candlelight Session
      • Multi-Institutional Research Submissions
      • Thinking Out of the Box
      • Workshop and Panel Submissions
    • Institutional Members & Sponsors
      • 2024 ASE Institutional Members and Sponsors
    • Exhibits and Commercial Promotion Opportunities
      • 2024 ASE Industry, Foundation and Society Sponsors
      • 2024 Surgical Education Week Exhibitors
    • Meetings Archives
    • Media Gallery
  • Awards & Programs
    • Academy of Clerkship Directors
    • Academic Program Administrator Certification in Surgery
    • 2023-2024 Association for Surgical Education Curriculum in Education Innovation and Teaching (ASCENT)
    • ASE/APDS: Collaborative Grant Initiative
    • Education Awards
    • Multi-Institutional Research Grant
    • ASE DEI Underrepresented in Medicine (URiM) Scholarship Application
    • Surgical Education and Leadership Fellowship (SELF)
    • Surgical Education Research Fellowship (SERF)
      • Surgical Education Research Fellowship Graduates
    • Visiting Scholar Fellowship
    • Ethics of Surgery Fellowship (EthoS)
  • Foundation
    • Donate Now!
    • Foundation Board
    • Honoring Our Surgical Education Mentors and Educators
    • The ASE Foundation: Building for the Future – Donors
    • Deb DaRosa Scholarship Application
    • Dr. Debra DaRosa Career Development Scholarship – Donors
    • CESERT Pyramid Grant Application
    • Spotlight on CESERT Pyramid Grant Awardees!
    • Newsletter
    • Annual Report
    • Review Committee
    • Grants Awarded
    • Corporate Partners
  • Resources
    • Policy for Conducting Survey Research of ASE Members
    • Nonphysician Professional Educator
    • Educational Materials
    • Collaborative Curricula
    • Getting Started in Surgical Education Research
    • Surgical Education Research Modules
    • Surgical Education Research Webinar Series
    • Podcasts
    • Teaching Modules
    • ASE CoSEF Peer Engagement for Education Research Success Webinar Series
  • ATLAS
  • Donate
  • Login

Annual Meeting 2018 Presentations

PS1 - 05: HOW MANY MAKES A CROWD? AN ADAPTIVE STRATEGY FOR CROWD RECRUITMENT FOR SURGICAL SKILL ASSESSMENT.
Anand Malpani, PhD, Narges Ahmidi, PhD, Lisa Ishii, MD, MHS, S. Swaroop Vedula, MBBS, PhD, Gregory D Hager, PhD, Masaru Ishii, MD, PhD; Johns Hopkins University

 

Objective: To determine whether an adaptive strategy to recruit crowds for surgical skill assessment yields reliable and valid ratings at a lower cost than recruiting crowds of a fixed size.

Methods: We recruited 5 faculty experts (FE) and at least 23 crowd workers (CW) on Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT) to rate technical skill for endoscopic sinus surgery tasks. To compare reliability and validity with different sizes of CW, we used a dataset of FE and CW ratings for overall skill (binary; good/bad) on 36 task instances. We repeatedly subsampled k = 3, 5, 7, and 9 CW ratings for each task (999 iterations). We compared inter-rater agreement between FE and CW using Fleiss’ kappa. We computed accuracy of CW using FE ratings as groundtruth. We used a separate dataset of 293 task instances to estimate cost savings using adaptive recruitment of CW. In this strategy, if percent agreement between the first 3 CW is below 75% then we recruit an additional 2 CW, and repeat upto a maximum of 9 CW. We calculated cost in terms of CW units (1 unit = 1 CW rating a task).

Results:

Figure 1 illustrates that fewer CW ratings did not result in a significant drop in reliability (solid line; 0.47, 0.48, 0.48, and 0.48) or validity (dashed line; 0.86, 0.88, 0.89, and 0.90) for 3, 5, 7, and 9 CW respectively. Using the adaptive recruitment strategy, 172 task instances required 3 CW, 70 required 5 CW, 3 required 7 CW, and 48 required 9 CW. This corresponds to a total of 1319 CW units compared with 2637 CW units if a fixed sample of 9 CW were recruited for all task instances.

Conclusions: Adaptive recruitment of CW from AMT for surgical skill assessment yields substantial cost savings (50% reduction) without significant loss in reliability and accuracy (4% reduction). Adaptive recruitment of CW accounts for task complexity to enable efficient, scalable crowdsourcing for surgical skill assessment.

Footer

Contact the ASE

11300 W. Olympic Blvd
Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90064 USA
(310) 215-1226
[email protected]

Follow ASE

  • LinkedIn
  • X

Advanced Training in Laparoscopic Suturing

The Official Journal of the Association for Surgical Education

Follow GSE on X

  • X