ArticleActa orthopaedica2024
Intraoperative fluoroscopy skills in distal radius fracture surgery: valid and reliable assessment on a novel immersive virtual reality simulator.
Article in Acta orthopaedica, 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.
- Assessment of surgical skills on a novel expert-informed immersive virtual reality simulator for distal radius fracture fixation: a cross-sectional validation study.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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeOrthopedic trainees must be able to perform intraoperative fluoroscopy imaging to assess the surgical result after volar locking plate surgeries of distal radius fractures. Guided by Messick's contemporary validity framework, the aim of our study was to gather evidence of validity for a test of proficiency for intraoperative imaging of a distal radius fracture using a novel immersive virtual reality simulator.
methods11 novices and 9 experienced surgeons employed at orthopedic departments completed 2 individual simulator sessions. At each session the participants performed 3 repetitions of an intraoperative fluoroscopic control of a distal radius fracture, consisting of 5 different fluoroscopic views. Several performance metrics were automatically recorded by the simulator and compared between the 2 groups.
resultsSimulator metrics for 3 of the 5 fluoroscopic views could discriminate between novices and experienced surgeons. An estimated composite score based on these 3 views showed good test-retest reliability, ICC = 0.82 (confidence interval 0.65-0.92; P < 0.001). A discriminatory standard was set at a composite score of 6.15 points resulting in 1 false positive (i.e., novice scoring better than the standard), and 1 false negative (i.e., experienced surgeon scoring worse than the standard).
conclusionThis study provided validity evidence from all 5 sources of Messick's contemporary validity framework (content, response process, internal structure, relationship with other variables, and consequences) for a simulation-based test of proficiency in intraoperative fluoroscopic control of a distal radius fracture fixated by a volar locking plate.
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.