ReviewJournal of neuroendovascular therapy2023
Questionnaire Survey of Neurointerventional Simulation Training in the Japanese Society for Neuroendovascular Therapy.
Review in Journal of neuroendovascular therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objective: Simulation training has focused on education and practical training. However, the adoption rate of neurointerventional simulation training in Japan is unknown. Therefore, we sent a questionnaire survey form to consulting specialists from the Japanese Society for Neuroendovascular Therapy (JSNET) to clarify the actual simulation training situation and compare the differences between university hospitals and general hospitals in Japan. Methods: The questionnaire survey was conducted in 243 neurosurgical training facilities that had JSNET consulting specialists between May 31, 2021 and July 31, 2021. The questionnaire survey forms were distributed by Google Forms. Results: A total of 162 facilities responded to the survey (response rate: 66.7%; 35.2% from university hospitals and 64.8% from general hospitals). The adoption rate for simulation training was 53.7%, and it was significantly higher in the university hospitals than in the general hospitals (64.9% vs. 47.6%, Conclusion: The adoption rate for simulation training was 53.7% in the training facilities of JSNET, and it was higher in the university hospitals than in the general hospitals. Most of the respondents answered that simulation training is an effective tool to improve neurointerventional skills. They also requested the establishment of simulation training programs and simulation tools.
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.