ArticleSurgical endoscopy2019
Construct, content and face validity of the eoSim laparoscopic simulator on advanced suturing tasks.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transferability of the robot assisted and laparoscopic suturing learning curves.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Trial
- Remote training in laparoscopy: a randomized trial comparing home-based self-regulated training to centralized instructor-regulated training.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Trial
- Objective Assessment of Ergonomics and Performance of Thoracic Surgeons During Real-Life Anatomical Robotic Pulmonary Resections.Interdisciplinary cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2025Observational
- A Novel 3D-Printed Mouse Model for Surgical Training: Multicenter Construct, Face, and Content Validation Study.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2025Article
- Optimizing skill acquisition: the role of self-assessment during a continuous training program for laparoscopic suturing.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Development of anatomically accurate digital organ models for surgical simulation and training.PloS one · 2025Article
- Evaluation of a novel home-based laparoscopic and core surgical skills programme (Monash Online Surgical Training).Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Haptic based fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery simulation for training with objective assessments.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2024Article
- Development and validation of the thyroidectomy training box: cervical simulator for training endoscopic transoral thyroidectomy.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2024Article
- Objective assessment for open surgical suturing training by finger tracking can discriminate novices from experts.Medical education online · 2023Article
- The effect of continuous at-home training of minimally invasive surgical skills on skill retention.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- A haptic laparoscopic trainer based on affine velocity analysis: engineering and preliminary results.BMC surgery · 2021Article
- Training benchmarks based on validated composite scores for the RobotiX robot-assisted surgery simulator on basic tasks.Journal of robotic surgery · 2021Article
- Development of a posterior sagittal anorectal surgical teaching model.BMC pediatrics · 2021Article
- Development and validation of a simulator for teaching minimally invasive thoracic surgery in Brazil.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2021Article
- LongTerm Outcomes of Three-Port Laparoscopic Right HemicolectomyFrontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Assessment of validity evidence for the RobotiX robot assisted surgery simulator on advanced suturing tasks.BMC surgery · 2020Article
- Robot assisted versus laparoscopic suturing learning curve in a simulated setting.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Use of a Low-Cost Portable 3D Virtual Reality Gesture-Mediated Simulator for Training and Learning Basic Psychomotor Skills in Minimally Invasive Surgery: Development and Content Validity Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Article
- Development and Validation of a Homemade, Low-Cost Laparoscopic Simulator for Resident Surgeons (LABOT).International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to validate the eoSim, an affordable and mobile inanimate laparoscopic simulator with instrument tracking capabilities, regarding face, content and construct validity on complex suturing tasks.
methodsParticipants recruited for this study were novices (no laparoscopic experience), target group for this training (surgical/gynaecologic/urologic residents, > 10 basic and < 20 advanced laparoscopic procedures) and experts (> 20 advanced laparoscopic procedures). Each participant performed the intracorporeal suturing exercise (Task 1), an upside down needle transfer (Task 2, developed for this study) and an anastomosis needle transfer (Task 3). Following, the participants completed a questionnaire regarding their demographics and opinion on the eoSim in terms of realism, didactic value and usability. Measured outcome parameters were time, distance, percentage of instrument tip off-screen, working area, speed, acceleration and smoothness.
resultsIn total, 104 participants completed the study, of which 60 novices, 31 residents and 13 experts. Face and content validity results showed a mean positive opinion on realism (3.9 Task 1, 3.6 Task 2 and 3.7 Task 3), didactic value (4.0, 3.4 and 3.7, respectively) and usability (4.2. 3.7 and 4.0, respectively). There were no significant differences in these outcomes between the specified expertise groups. Construct validity results showed significant differences between experts, target group or novices for Task 1 in terms of time (means 339, 607 and 1224 s, respectively, p < 0.001) and distance (means 8.1, 15.6 and 21.7 m, respectively, p < 0.001). Task 2 showed significant differences between groups regarding time (p < 0.001), distance (p 0.003), off-screen (p < 0.001) and working area (p < 0.001). Task 3 showed significant differences between groups, after subanalyses, on total number of stitches (p < 0.001), time per stitch (p < 0.001) and distance per stitch (p < 0.001).
conclusionsThe results of this study indicate that the eoSim is a potential meaningful and valuable simulator in the training of suturing tasks.
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.