ArticleHealth science reports2024
Comparing virtual reality and simulation to teach the assessment and management of acute surgical scenarios: A pilot study.
Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of Virtual Simulations Versus Mannequins and Real Persons in Medical and Nursing Education: Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Review
- The role of remote and virtual surgical training in expanding cardiothoracic surgical capacity in low-resource regions.BMC surgery · 2025Review
- Comparing virtual reality and simulation to teach the assessment and management of acute surgical scenarios: A pilot study.Health science 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Traditional apprenticeship-based surgical training presents with challenges, especially in acute scenarios. Simulation provides the current standard of facilitating surgical training in a low-risk environment but is restricted by limited accessibility and high costs. Virtual reality (VR) offers immersive three-dimensional computer-generated training scenarios and can connect users from various locations. We aimed to compare the performance of junior doctors to manage an acute surgical scenario using VR and mannequin-based simulation. We hypothesised that VR would be as effective as mannequin-based simulation in performance outcomes. Methods: This multicentre, randomised controlled pilot study was conducted with eighteen junior doctor volunteers (Foundation and Core Trainee Year 1). Ten were randomly allocated to VR and eight to mannequin-based simulation. Participants completed questionnaires and a 15-min pneumothorax scenario. Quantitative metrics included overall score, time-to-critical decisions, and academic buoyancy scores (ABS). Qualitative metrics included participants' likes and dislikes of their allocated simulation modality. Results: VR participants scored significantly higher than mannequin-based simulation participants in overall scores (74.30% (SD ± 5.08%) Conclusion: Both VR and mannequin-based simulation training are effective in training junior doctors in acute surgical scenarios but present different educational benefits. Future research should recruit a larger sample size for a full comparative randomised controlled trial.
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.