ArticleScientific reports2023
A validated test has been developed for assessment of manual small incision cataract surgery skills using virtual reality simulation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validity assessment for technical skills and stress management of the HelpMeSeeActa ophthalmologica · 2026Article
- Virtual Reality in Ophthalmic Surgical Education: Current Innovations and Future Perspectives [Response to Letter].Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Advances in the application of virtual reality technology in ophthalmic surgical skills training.International journal of ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Virtual Reality in Ophthalmic Surgical Education: Current Innovations and Future Perspectives.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- A Shared Control Approach to Robot-Assisted Cataract Surgery Training for Novice Surgeons.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Validity evidence of a new virtual reality simulator for phacoemulsification training in cataract surgery.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigates the validity evidence of metrics used for the assessment of surgical skills for Manual Small Incision Cataract Surgery (MSICS) in a virtual reality simulator. MSICS surgery is a low-cost, low-technology cataract surgery technique, which is widely used in low- and middle-income countries. However, there is a lack of cataract surgeons globally, and efficient and evidence-based training of new surgeons is needed. In order to investigate the validity of simulator metrics, we included three groups of participants: (1) MSICS novices who were ophthalmologists with no cataract surgery experience, (2) MSICS novices who were experienced phacoemulsification cataract surgeons, but with no MSICS experience, and (3) experienced phacoemulsification and MSICS surgeons. The evaluation included 11 steps of the MSICS procedure, and all simulator metrics for those steps were reviewed. Of the 55 initial metrics, 30 showed high positive discriminative ability. A test passing score of 20 out of 30 was established, and one of 15 novices with no MSICS experience (mean score 15.5) and 7 out of 10 experienced MSICS surgeons (mean score 22.7) passed the test. We have developed and established validity evidence for a test for MSICS skills in a virtual reality simulator for future use in proficiency-based training and evidence-based testing of training interventions.
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.