ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Evaluation of a novel home-based laparoscopic and core surgical skills programme (Monash Online Surgical Training).
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transforming thyroid disease education: AI and virtual technologies in residency training.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Augmented Reality and Gamification vs. Traditional Surgical Instrument Training on Knowledge and Skills of Medical Students: A 2×2 Factorial Randomized Study.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Training total laparoscopic gastropexy using a composed simulator and evaluating the significant transfer of surgical skills performed in growing pigs in vivo.BMC veterinary research · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLimitations to surgical education access were exacerbated during the COVID-19 Pandemic. In response, we created a national home-based comprehensive surgical skills course: Monash Online Surgical Training (MOST). Our aim was to evaluate the educational impact of this approach.
methodsA remote, 6-week course was designed with learning objectives aligned to the national surgical training. Participants received a personal laparoscopic bench trainer, instrument tracking software, live webinars, access to an online theoretical learning platform, and individualised feedback by system-generated or expert surgeons' assessments. Mixed method analysis of instrument tracking metrics, pre- and post-course questionnaires (11 core surgical domains) and participant comments was utilised. Data were analysed using the Mann-Whitney U test, and a p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsA total of 54 participants with varied levels of experience (1 to > 6 years post-graduate level) completed MOST. All 11 learning-outcome domains demonstrated statistically significant improvement including core laparoscopic skills (1.4/5 vs 2.8/5, p < 0.0001) and handling laparoscopic instruments (1.5/5 vs 2.8/5, p < 0.0001). A total of 3460 tasks were completed reflecting 158.2 h (9492 min) of practice, 394 were submitted for formal feedback. Participants rated the course (mean 8.5/10, SD 1.6), live webinars (mean 8.9/10, SD 1.6) and instrument tracking software (mean 8.6, SD 1.7) highly. Qualitative analysis revealed a paradigm shift including the benefits of a safe learning environment and self-paced, self-directed learning.
conclusionThe MOST course demonstrates the successful implementation of a fully remote laparoscopic simulation course which participants found to be an effective tool to acquire core surgical skills.
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.