Trial reportWorld journal of surgery2019
Comparison of Training Efficacy Between Custom-Made Skills Simulator (CMSS) and da Vinci Skills Simulators: A Randomized Control Study.
Trial report in World journal of surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Design and implementation of modular laparoscopic general surgery models for surgical education.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2025Article
- Detailed analysis of learning phases and outcomes in robotic and endoscopic thyroidectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Outcomes, Measurement Instruments, and Their Validity Evidence in Randomized Controlled Trials on Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Reality in Undergraduate Medical Education: Systematic Mapping Review.JMIR serious games · 2022Review
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
backgroundTo compare the effectiveness of a custom-made skills simulator (CMSS) with the commercially available da Vinci
methodsA randomized control study was conducted to determine the performance of participants after undergoing robotic surgical training. Total 64 students who had no previous experience with robotic surgery enrolled this study. After 5 min-introduction of robotic surgical system, the participants got random-assignment into two groups to perform either CMSS-or DVSS-exercises. After 15 min-practicing the corresponding simulator, task-execution performance and individual questionnaires were compared between participants trained with the CMSS and those trained with the DVSS.
resultsRegardless of simulator the participants used, the system understanding and manipulation ability of the participants was found to be higher than after completing the simulation-based robotic surgical training (p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in terms of the required time to complete the tasks, and improvement of understanding the concept of robotic surgery, or surgical skill capacity between two groups (p > 0.05).
conclusionsThe training effectiveness of CMSS was not significantly different to DVSS. It can be synergetic tool to DVSS for novice trainees of robotic surgery to get accustomed to the robotic surgical system and to improve their basic robotic surgical skills.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31399794What 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.