Trial reportInternational journal of medical education2015
Individualized feedback during simulated laparoscopic training:a mixed methods study.
Trial report in International journal of medical education, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Structured feedback and operative video debriefing with critical view of safety annotation in training of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled study.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Trial
- Tele-mentoring - a way to expand laparoscopic simulator training for medical students over large distances: a prospective randomized pilot study.BMC medical education · 2023Trial
- Does supervision matter? A randomized controlled study of laparoscopic simulator training in undergraduate education.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Enhancing laparoscopic simulator performance with eye-tracking video feedback: a mixed-methods pilot study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- "Self-Designed Simulation-Based Laparoscopic Training Program for Urology Residents: Results After 6 Years of Experience".Advances in medical education and practice · 2024Article
- Quantitative influence and performance analysis of virtual reality laparoscopic surgical training system.BMC medical education · 2022Article
- The Use of Feedback in Improving the Knowledge, Attitudes and Skills of Medical Students: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Medical science educator · 2021Review
- Baseline characteristics in laparoscopic simulator performance: The impact of personal computer (PC)-gaming experience and visuospatial ability.Surgery open science · 2021Article
- Personalized Adaptive Training Improves Performance at a Professional First-Person Shooter Action Videogame.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Simulation-based skills training in non-performing orthopedic surgeons: skills acquisition, motivation, and flow during the COVID-19 pandemic.Acta orthopaedica · 2020Article
- Trends in UK endoscopy training in the BSG trainees' national survey and strategic planning for the future.Frontline gastroenterology · 2018Article
- Adapting Feedback to Individual Residents: An Examination of Preceptor Challenges and Approaches.Journal of graduate medical education · 2018Article
- Article
- Opportunity to Perform - Should Simulation-Based Surgical Training be Provided on Demand or on Supply?Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to explore the value of individualized feedback on performance, flow and self-efficacy during simulated laparoscopy. Furthermore, we wished to explore attitudes towards feedback and simulator training among medical students.
methodsSixteen medical students were included in the study and randomized to laparoscopic simulator training with or without feedback. A teacher provided individualized feedback continuously throughout the procedures to the target group. Validated questionnaires and scales were used to evaluate self-efficacy and flow. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to evaluate differences between groups regarding laparoscopic performance (instrument path length), self-efficacy and flow. Qualitative data was collected by group interviews and interpreted using inductive thematic analyses.
resultsSixteen students completed the simulator training and questionnaires. Instrument path length was shorter in the feedback group (median 3.9 m; IQR: 3.3-4.9) as compared to the control group (median 5.9 m; IQR: 5.0-8.1), p<0.05. Self-efficacy improved in both groups. Eleven students participated in the focus interviews. Participants in the control group expressed that they had fun, whereas participants in the feedback group were more concentrated on the task and also more anxious. Both groups had high ambitions to succeed and also expressed the importance of getting feedback. The authenticity of the training scenario was important for the learning process.
conclusionsThis study highlights the importance of individualized feedback during simulated laparoscopy training. The next step is to further optimize feedback and to transfer standardized and individualized feedback from the simulated setting to the operating room.
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.