ArticleActa cirurgica brasileira2024
Simulators in urology resident's training in retrograde intrarenal surgery.
Article in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application and evaluation of a virtual patient system based on a multi-branch dynamic decision model in orthopedic graduate medical education.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Cardiac Simulator Technologies and Design for Medical Education and Auscultation Training: A Systematic Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the impact of simulators on the training of urology residents in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).
methodsThe study involved training eight urology residents, using two artificial simulators; one developed by the Universidade Estadual do Pará, using three-dimensional printing technology, and the other one patented by the medical equipment manufacturer Boston Scientific The qualification of residents took place through a training course, consisting of an adaptation phase (S0), followed by three training sessions, with weekly breaks between them (S1, S2 and S3). Study members should carry out a RIRS in a standardized way, with step-by-step supervision by the evaluator using a checklist. The participants' individual performance was verified through a theoretical assessment, before and after training (pre- and post-training), as well as by the score achieved in each session on a scale called global psychomotor skill score. In S3, residents performed an analysis of the performance and quality of the simulation, by completing the scale of student satisfaction and self confidence in learning (SSSCL).
resultsAt the end of the course, everyone was able to perform the procedure in accordance with the standard. The training provided a learning gain and a considerable improvement in skills and competencies in RIRS, with p < 0.05. SSSCL demonstrated positive feedback, with an overall approval rating of 96%.
conclusionsArtificial simulators proved to be excellent auxiliary tools in the training of urology residents in RIRS.
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.