Trial reportSimulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare2025
Evaluating the Value of Eye-Tracking Augmented Debriefing in Medical Simulation-A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Virtual reality simulation with eye-tracking feedback versus mannequin-based training for situational awareness in trauma management under simulated emergency department interruptions in Iran: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Journal of educational evaluation for health professions · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDebriefing after simulation facilitates reflective thinking and learning. Eye-tracking augmented debriefing (ETAD) may provide advantages over traditional debriefing (TD) by leveraging video replay with first-person perspective. This multisite randomized controlled trial compared the impact of ETAD with TD (without eye-tracking and without video) after simulation on 4 outcomes: (1) resident metacognitive awareness (the primary outcome), (2) cognitive load (CL) of residents and debriefers, (3) alignment of resident self-assessment and debriefer assessment scores, and (4) resident and debriefer perceptions of the debriefing experience.
methodFifty-four emergency medicine residents from 2 institutions were randomized to the experimental (ETAD) or the control (TD) arm. Residents completed 2 simulation stations followed by debriefing. Before station 1 and after station 2, residents completed a Metacognition Awareness Inventory (MAI). After each station, debriefers and residents rated their CL and completed an assessment of performance. After the stations, residents were interviewed and debriefers participated in a focus group.
resultsThere were no statistically significant differences in mean MAI change, resident CL, or assessment alignment between residents and debriefers. Debriefer CL was lower in the experimental arm. Interviews identified 4 themes: (1) reflections related to debriefing approach, (2) eye-tracking as a metacognitive sensitizer, (3) translation of metacognition to practice, and (4) ETAD as a strategy to manage CL. Residents reported that eye tracking improved the specificity of feedback. Debriefers relied less on notes, leveraged video timestamps, appreciated the structure of the eye-tracking video, and found the video useful when debriefing poor performers.
conclusionsThere were no significant quantitative differences in MAI or resident CL scores; qualitative findings suggest that residents appreciated the benefits of the eye-tracking video review. Debriefers expended less CL and reported less perceived mental effort with the new technology. Future research should leverage longitudinal experimental designs to further understand the impact of eye-tracking facilitated debriefing.
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.