Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2024
Structured feedback and operative video debriefing with critical view of safety annotation in training of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled study.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cognitive learning versus practical "hands-on" training for acquisition of laparoscopic surgical skills: an optimal combination study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Trial
- Head-mounted camera as a debriefing tool for surgical simulation-based training: a randomized controlled study in Senegal.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Use of Operative Video Technology in Surgical Education: A Systematic Review.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Review
- AI-based computer vision as an adjunct tool for CVS documentation in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- An artificial intelligence-based navigation system for enhancing anatomical recognition and safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a pilot study.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Structured Feedback Tools in Surgical Training: Results of the Endo-Workshop of the German Society of Residents in Urology 2024.Urologia internationalis · 2026Article
- Automated Operative Phase and Step Recognition in Vestibular Schwannoma Surgery: Development and Preclinical Evaluation of a Deep Learning Neural Network (IDEAL Stage 0).Neurosurgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Bile Duct Injury and Litigation in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Global Review of Current and Future Preventative Initiatives.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe learning curve in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is lengthened compared to open surgery. It has been reported that structured feedback and training in teams of two trainees improves MIS training and MIS performance. Annotation of surgical images and videos may prove beneficial for surgical training. This study investigated whether structured feedback and video debriefing, including annotation of critical view of safety (CVS), have beneficial learning effects in a predefined, multi-modal MIS training curriculum in teams of two trainees.
methodsThis randomized-controlled single-center study included medical students without MIS experience (n = 80). The participants first completed a standardized and structured multi-modal MIS training curriculum. They were then randomly divided into two groups (n = 40 each), and four laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LCs) were performed on ex-vivo porcine livers each. Students in the intervention group received structured feedback after each LC, consisting of LC performance evaluations through tutor-trainee joint video debriefing and CVS video annotation. Performance was evaluated using global and LC-specific Objective Structured Assessments of Technical Skills (OSATS) and Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS) scores.
resultsThe participants in the intervention group had higher global and LC-specific OSATS as well as global and LC-specific GOALS scores than the participants in the control group (25.5 ± 7.3 vs. 23.4 ± 5.1, p = 0.003; 47.6 ± 12.9 vs. 36 ± 12.8, p < 0.001; 17.5 ± 4.4 vs. 16 ± 3.8, p < 0.001; 6.6 ± 2.3 vs. 5.9 ± 2.1, p = 0.005). The intervention group achieved CVS more often than the control group (1. LC: 20 vs. 10 participants, p = 0.037, 2. LC: 24 vs. 8, p = 0.001, 3. LC: 31 vs. 8, p < 0.001, 4. LC: 31 vs. 10, p < 0.001).
conclusionsStructured feedback and video debriefing with CVS annotation improves CVS achievement and ex-vivo porcine LC training performance based on OSATS and GOALS scores.
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.