ArticleBMC medical education2025
Evaluation of a simulation-based ophthalmology education workshop for medical students: a pilot project.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsOphthalmology is an under-represented specialty in many medical school curriculums resulting in reduced confidence in medical students and clinicians when dealing with eye conditions. Our study evaluates the impact of a simulation-based education (SBE) workshop to train medical students in ophthalmology.
methodsSecond-year medical students were invited to participate in a two-day (eight-hour) simulation-based ophthalmology workshop. Standardised patients, free-to-use simulators, and low-cost eye models were used to teach eye anatomy, physiology, pathologies, skills (slit-lamp, ophthalmoscopy etc.), and eye procedures (cataract surgery, eye lasers etc.). Learners filled questionnaires to evaluate their ophthalmology interest, confidence, and knowledge before the workshop, immediately after the workshop, and three months later. They also answered a feedback survey on the workshop's quality and usefulness immediately after the workshop.
resultsNine students, including six females and three males, participated in the workshop. Pre-workshop, learners' mean self-reported confidence in dealing with ophthalmology patients was 1.8/5 and mean self-reported interest in pursuing an ophthalmology residency was 2.6/5 on a Likert-scale-based questionnaire (on a scale of 1-5). Learners scored a mean of 8.4/15 on an ophthalmology knowledge questionnaire with fifteen questions. Post-workshop (immediate), their mean self-reported confidence was 3.4/5 (p = 0.0001), interest in pursuing an ophthalmology residency was 3.2/5 (p = 0.022), and score on the ophthalmology questionnaire was 13/15 (p = 0.0001). Three months later, students' self-reported mean confidence was 3.2/5 (p = 0.0001), the likelihood of choosing ophthalmology residency was 2.8/5 (p = 0.59), and score on the ophthalmology knowledge questionnaire was 11/15 (p = 0.006). The feedback survey showed that all students found the workshop relevant, comprehensive, easy to understand, and that they gained knowledge/skills applicable to their future clinical practice.
conclusionsA small group SBE ophthalmology workshop improves learners' knowledge, skills, and confidence using an approach they find interesting, with low cost and time investment.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.