ArticleHeliyon2024
Evaluation of the utility of surgical simulation software in medical postgraduate education.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: The use of medical simulation software in medical institutions is growing to address teaching challenges. The study aims to assess the effectiveness of the Touch Surgery app, a free medical simulation software, as a supplement to the teaching methodology of unified surgery for medical students. Methods: Twenty-three postgraduate students, divided into three groups based on residency training years, and five senior orthopedic surgeons took part in the study. Each participant completed three modules within the Large External Fixators module using the Touch Surgery app. The results achieved by orthopedic specialists and postgraduates in the test module were recorded separately. The orthopedic specialists' first test module scores were used as a baseline. A Likert survey assessed the usefulness and content accuracy of the app. Statistical analysis included analysis of variance and 2-tailed Results: The first and second scores achieved by the postgraduates in the three groups were significantly different from the baseline of the orthopedic specialists, but the mean scores of all postgraduate's groups increased with simulator usage for learning and by the third attempt they were at the same level as the orthopedic specialists. However, no significant performance differences were observed between postgraduates with different training years. Postgraduates expressed a positive opinion of the usefulness and content of Touch Surgery in the questionnaire and their intention to continue using it in their future studies. Conclusions: This study shows that the use of Touch Surgery improves postgraduates' performance and ultimately enables them to reach the level of orthopedic specialists in simulated surgery, and received positive ratings for the software's experience and content. Touch Surgery can be a valuable complement to traditional surgical teaching methods, bridging the gap between theoretical learning from textbooks and guided rehearsals of surgical steps and skills.
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.