ArticleSurgical endoscopy2013
Needs analysis for developing a virtual-reality NOTES simulator.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Empowering surgeons with integrated synthetic data: solutions for mastering complex clinical scenarios.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Review
- Research trends in virtual reality surgical simulation for education: a systematic review.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2025Review
- Validation of NOViSE.Surgical innovation · 2017Article
- Face and content validation of a Virtual Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery Trainer (VTEST™).Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- NOViSE: a virtual natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery simulator.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2016Article
- Graphic and haptic simulation for transvaginal cholecystectomy training in NOTES.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2016Article
- Pre-clinical Training for New Notes Procedures: From Ex-vivo Models to Virtual Reality Simulators.Gastrointestinal endoscopy clinics of North America · 2016Review
- Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): emerging trends and specifications for a virtual simulator.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- Toward scar-free surgery: an analysis of the increasing complexity from laparoscopic surgery to NOTES.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- A comparison of NOTES transvaginal and laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedures based upon task analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2014Article
- Proficiency in Laparoscopic Training: online versus Onsite Suturing Courses.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsObservational
- Defining medical simulators for simulation-based education in EUS: Theoretical approach and a narrative review.Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
unlabelledINTRODUCTION AND STUDY
aimNatural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is an emerging surgical technique that requires a cautious adoption approach to ensure patient safety. High-fidelity virtual-reality-based simulators allow development of new surgical procedures and tools and train medical personnel without risk to human patients. As part of a project funded by the National Institutes of Health, we are developing the virtual transluminal endoscopic surgery trainer (VTEST) for this purpose. The objective of this study is to conduct a structured needs analysis to identify the design parameters for such a virtual-reality-based simulator for NOTES.
methodsA 30-point questionnaire was distributed at the 2011 National Orifice Surgery Consortium for Assessment and Research meeting to obtain responses from experts. Ordinal logistic regression and the Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used for analysis.
resultsA total of 22 NOTES experts participated in the study. Cholecystectomy (CE, 68 %) followed by appendectomy (AE, 63 %) (CE vs AE, p = 0.0521) was selected as the first choice for simulation. Flexible (FL, 47 %) and hybrid (HY, 47 %) approaches were equally favorable compared with rigid (RI, 6 %) with p < 0.001 for both FL versus RI and HY versus RI. The transvaginal approach was preferred 3 to 1 to the transgastric. Most participants preferred two-channel (2C) scopes (65 %) compared with single (1C) or three (3C) or more channels with p < 0.001 for both 2C versus 1C and 2C versus 3C. The importance of force feedback and the utility of a virtual NOTES simulator in training and testing new tools for NOTES were rated very high by the participants.
conclusionOur study reinforces the importance of developing a virtual NOTES simulator and clearly presents expert preferences. The results of this analysis will direct our initial development of the VTEST platform.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.