ArticleCardiovascular and interventional radiology2024
Endovascular Simulator Training and Shadowing in Interventional Radiology: A Comparison of Two Teaching Methods in the Curricular Training of Medical Students.
Article in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 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.
- A Scoping Review of Interventional Radiology Curricula for Medical Students and Correlation with Kern's Six-Step Framework for Curriculum Development.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Review
- 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
Abstract
purposeTo identify the impact of endovascular simulator training and shadowing in interventional radiology on medical students' self-assessed IR knowledge. Moreover, the sequence of the teaching methods and its influence on the self-assessed IR knowledge is investigated. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 19 fourth-year medical students participated in this study. Eleven students completed shadowing live cases first and endovascular simulator training the following day. Eight students completed the teaching in reversed order. Questionnaires were completed before and after each teaching method. The students assessed their knowledge of instruments and materials, steps of the Seldinger technique, and aortography on a Likert scale (1 = "I do not agree at all," 5 = "I fully agree").
resultsAfter simulator training, the students stated a significant increase in perceived knowledge compared with baseline (p < 0.001). Shadowing led to a significant improvement regarding the items "knowledge of instruments and materials" (3.2 vs. 3.8, p = 0.008) and "steps of the Seldinger technique" (3.7 vs. 3.9, p = 0.046). Self-assessed knowledge after simulator training increased significantly more regarding Seldinger technique compared with shadowing (+ 1.2 vs. + 0.2, p < 0.001). Simulator training before shadowing was significantly more effective regarding the increase in "knowledge of the steps of aortography" compared with the reverse sequence (+ 2.0 vs. + 0.9, p = 0.041).
conclusionEndovascular simulator training and shadowing are both feasible tools to improve medical students' perceived knowledge of interventional radiology. When organizing teaching, simulator training before shadowing can have a positive impact on self-assessed knowledge.
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.