Trial reportScientific reports2024
Validation of a novel, low-fidelity virtual reality simulator and an artificial intelligence assessment approach for peg transfer laparoscopic training.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- e-Learning, Distance Education, and Virtual and Augmented Reality in Orthopedic Training: European Cross-Sectional Survey of Trainee Acceptance Guided by the Technology Acceptance Model and Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic training in porcine models: a tool for continuous professional skill enhancement for paediatric surgeons.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- Construct validation of a portable virtual reality simulator for [Formula: see text] laparoscopic camera navigation via machine learning and latent behavioral modeling.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Minimally Invasive and Robotic Gastrointestinal Surgery: Major Applications and Recent Advances.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Sensorized Vascular High-Fidelity Physical Simulator for Robot-Assisted Surgery Training: A Multisite Pilot Evaluation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Transforming thyroid disease education: AI and virtual technologies in residency training.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Systematic Review of Its Role in Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Visual attention and cognitive workload using different laparoscopic box trainers and mixed-reality feedback.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Cardiac Simulator Technologies and Design for Medical Education and Auscultation Training: A Systematic Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The Impact of Minimally Invasive Surgical Modality and Task Complexity on Cognitive Workload: An fNIRS Study.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Exploring the Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-Driven Training in Laparoscopic Suturing: A Systematic Review of Skills Mastery, Retention, and Clinical Performance in Surgical Education.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Metaverse-based simulation: a scoping review of charting medical education over the last two decades in the lens of the 'marvelous medical education machine'.Annals of medicine · 2024Article
- Article
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
Abstract
Simulators are widely used in medical education, but objective and automatic assessment is not feasible with low-fidelity simulators, which can be solved with artificial intelligence (AI) and virtual reality (VR) solutions. The effectiveness of a custom-made VR simulator and an AI-based evaluator of a laparoscopic peg transfer exercise was investigated. Sixty medical students were involved in a single-blinded randomised controlled study to compare the VR simulator with the traditional box trainer. A total of 240 peg transfer exercises from the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery programme were analysed. The experts and AI-based software used the same criteria for evaluation. The algorithm detected pitfalls and measured exercise duration. Skill improvement showed no significant difference between the VR and control groups. The AI-based evaluator exhibited 95% agreement with the manual assessment. The average difference between the exercise durations measured by the two evaluation methods was 2.61 s. The duration of the algorithmic assessment was 59.47 s faster than the manual assessment. The VR simulator was an effective alternative practice compared with the training box simulator. The AI-based evaluation produced similar results compared with the manual assessment, and it could significantly reduce the evaluation time. AI and VR could improve the effectiveness of basic laparoscopic training.
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.