Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2022
Merged virtual reality teaching of the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Computer-based surgical skill training: a systematic review.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence in the Training of Radiology Residents: a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2025Trial
- Structured training program on confocal laser endomicroscopy for pancreatic cystic lesions: a multicenter prospective study among early-career endosonographers (with video).Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2023Trial
- Development and validation of a Novel 3D-printed mold-based silicone model for laparoscopic duodenal stump reinforcement suture simulation training.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Dynamic Augmented Reality Cues for Telementoring in Laparoscopic Surgery: Usability Study.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Development and external validation of a mixed-reality aneurysm clipping simulator.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Dynamic Augmented Reality Cues for Telementoring in Minimally Invasive Surgeries: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The impact of surgical simulation and training technologies on general surgery education.BMC medical education · 2024Review
- [Construction and Exploration of Simulative Virtual Curriculum of Laparoscopy for Standardized Surgical Residency Training].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2023Article
- LCCNN: a Lightweight Customized CNN-Based Distance Education App for COVID-19 Recognition.Mobile networks and applications : MONET · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic challenges our ability to provide surgical education, as our ability to gather and train together has been restricted due to safety concerns. However, the importance of quality surgical education has remained. High-fidelity simulation platforms have been developed that merge virtual reality video streams to allow for remote instruction and collaboration. This study sought to validate the use of a merged virtual reality (MVR) platform for the instruction and assessment of the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS) skills.
methodsThis was a prospective randomized controlled non-inferiority study. Thirty participants were randomized between three groups: The standard group received in-person instruction and expert feedback, the experimental group received identical training via the MVR platform, and the control group practiced on their own, but received no feedback. All participants were pre-tested for baseline performance at the beginning of the study. Change in performance was evaluated immediately after training and one month later for retention. Ordinary one-way analysis of variance was used to evaluate the effects of time, group, and time-on-group.
resultsThe pre-test confirmed baseline homogeneity between the groups. MVR was non-inferior to standard in-person training for total FLS times on either the post-test (p = 0.632) or the retention test (p = 0.829). Performance was also identical between MVR and standard training groups for each of the individual FLS tasks. Each group improved significantly in nearly all tasks after practice; however, the standard and MVR training groups both improved significantly more than controls for the ligating loop, extracorporeal suturing, intracorporeal suturing, and total FLS task training but did not reach statistical significance for peg transfer and pattern cut tasks.
conclusionThis randomized, controlled trial has demonstrated the use of an MVR platform as non-inferior to in-person instruction for the FLS program, forming the foundation for future work on remote instruction and collaboration.
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.