ArticleHeliyon2022
An online feedback system for laparoscopic training during the COVID-19 pandemic: evaluation from the trainer perspective.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Feedback differences between upper gastrointestinal and colorectal specialists observing laparoscopic trainee surgeon suturing videos.Surgery open science · 2025Article
- Using Real-Time Power BI Formative Feedback to Improve Nurse Anesthesia Students' Clinical Competence: An Educational Intervention.Health science reports · 2025Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: A system to provide feedback for laparoscopic training using an online conferencing system during the COVID-19 pandemic was developed. The purpose of this study is to evaluate this system from the trainer perspective. Design: A procedural feedback system using an online conferencing system was devised. Setting: Surgical training was observed using an online conferencing system (Zoom). Feedback was provided while viewing suture videos which are, as a feature of this system, pre-recorded. Feedback was then recorded. Trainer comments were then converted into text, summarized as feedback items, and sorted by suture phase which facilitates reflection. Trainers completed a questionnaire concerning the usability of the online feedback session. Results: Eleven trainers were selected. Physicians had an average experience of 21.9 ± 5.9 years (mean ± standard deviation). The total number of feedback items obtained by classifying each phase was 32. Based on questionnaire results, 91% of trainers were accustomed to the use of Zoom, and 100% felt that online procedural education was useful. In questions regarding system effectiveness, more than 70% of trainers answered positively to all questions, and in questions about efficiency, more than 70% of trainers answered positively. Only 55% of the trainers felt that this system was easy to use, but 91% were satisfied as trainers. Conclusions: The results of the questionnaire suggest that this system has high usability for training. This online system could be a useful tool for providing feedback in situations where face-to-face education is difficult.
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.