Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28721118›Full record

ReviewAdvances in medical education and practice2017

Ophthalmoscopy simulation: advances in training and practice for medical students and young ophthalmologists.

Lucas Holderegger Ricci, Caroline Amaral Ferraz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in medical education and practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Application of a 3D-printed eye model for teaching direct ophthalmoscopy to undergraduates.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Constant training in direct ophthalmoscopy.Advances in medical education and practice · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lucas Holderegger RicciDepartment of Ophthalmology, School of Medicine, Laureate International Universities, São Paulo (SP), Brazil.
Caroline Amaral FerrazDepartment of Ophthalmology, Federal University of São Paulo (UNIFESP), São Paulo (SP), Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe and appraise the latest simulation models for direct and indirect ophthalmoscopy as a learning tool in the medical field.

methodsThe present review was conducted using four national and international databases - PubMed, Scielo, Medline and Cochrane. Initial set of articles was screened based on title and abstracts, followed by full text analysis. It comprises of articles that were published in the past fifteen years (2002-2017).

resultsEighty-three articles concerning simulation models for medical education were found in national and international databases, with only a few describing important aspects of ophthalmoscopy training and current application of simulation in medical education. After secondary analysis, 38 articles were included.

conclusionDifferent ophthalmoscopy simulation models have been described, but only very few studies appraise the effectiveness of each individual model. Comparison studies are still required to determine best approaches for medical education and skill enhancement through simulation models, applied to both medical students as well as young ophthalmologists in training.

Indexed as

direct ophthalmoscopyindirect ophthalmoscopysimulation modelssimulatorskills

Identifiers

PMID28721118
PMCPMC5498681

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.