ReviewBMC medical education2020
Critical analysis of evidence about the impacts on surgical teams of 'mental practice' in systematic reviews: a systematic rapid evidence assessment (SREA).
Review in BMC medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mental Imagery to Enhance Procedural Skills in Peripheral Venous Catheterization: A Randomized Simulation Study in Medical Students.Perspectives on medical education · 2026Trial
- Surgical cognitive simulation improves real-world surgical performance: randomized study.BJS open · 2021Trial
- Neonatal endotracheal intubation: development of a comprehensive educational program for procedural skills.Pediatric research · 2026Review
- Effect of mental imagery using cognitive aids on the performance of novice anesthesiology residents during a simulated cardiopulmonary resuscitation.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Embedding mental rehearsal in surgery: a comprehensive review of the evidence.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Review
- Enhancing motor imagery practice using synchronous action observation.Psychological research · 2024Review
- The effects of task-oriented mental practice on upper limb function and coordination in chronic stroke patients-Randomized controlled trial design.The British journal of occupational therapy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMental Rehearsal (MR) the cognitive act of simulating a task in our heads to pre-experience events imaginatively. It has been used widely to improve individual and collective performance in fields outside healthcare and offers potential for more efficient training in time pressured surgical and medical team contexts. The study aims to review the current systematic review literature to determine the impact of MP on surgical performance and learning.
methodsMedline, Embase, British Educational Index, CINAHL, Web of Science PsycINFO, Cochrane databased were searched in the period 1994-2018. The primary outcomes measure were performance improvements in surgical technical skills, stress reduction, confidence and team performance. Study quality of the Systematic Reviews was assessed using AMSTAR 2, a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews. The reported impacts of MP in all included studies were mapped onto Kirkpatrick's framework for the evaluation of educational interventions.
resultsSix Systematic reviews were identified which met the inclusion criteria, of which all reported positive and varying benefits of MP on surgical performance, confidence, and coping strategies. However, reported impacts on a modified Kirkpatrick's framework did not exceed level 3. Mental practice was described in terms of mental imagery and mental rehearsal with most authors using each of the terms in their search strategies. The impacts on transfer to practice and the long- term acquisition of skills, but also personal uptake of mental practice routines were not reported.
conclusionThe majority of studies demonstrate benefits of MP for technical performance. Overall the systematic reviews were of medium to high quality. However, studies lacked a sufficiently articulated evaluation methodology to examine impacts beyond the immediate experimentations. This is also due to the limitations found in the primary studies. Future research should look at longitudinal mixed method evaluation designs and focus on real clinical teams.
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.