Observational studyBMC medical education2025
Educational efficacy of the simulation-based episiotomy training: a multi-center observational study.
Observational study in BMC medical education, 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.
- The effect of peer-assisted episiotomy repair simulation on anxiety and self-efficacy levels in midwifery students.BMC medical education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInterprofessional training programmes are now widely used for training junior doctors and nurses. This study aimed to evaluate the educational efficacy of an obstetric operative simulation programme in both junior and senior obstetricians and midwives.
methodsWe conducted a 30-minute professional course in midwifery at three obstetric centers in Zhejiang, China. The course mainly aimed at improving the knowledge and techniques of mediolateral episiotomies (MLE). Both junior and senior obstetricians and midwives were recruited for evaluation. A questionnaire was completed by all participants at the beginning. Systematic evaluation of individual's MLE skills were compared and analysed before and after the instructional session. The primary outcome was length of the episiotomy incision (mm). The secondary outcomes were the distance from the starting point of the incision to the fourchette (mm); and the perpendicular angle of incision (degrees). Continuous variables were presented as means ± SD or medians and ranges, with Student's t-test used for comparisons between groups. Categorical variables are presented as rates, and the chi-square test was employed to assess differences between proportions. Data were analysed using SPSS statistical software (version 19), with P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsEighty-two participants (35 obstetricians and 47 midwives) joined this programme, of which, 29 were junior obstetrics professionals and 53 were senior obstetrics professionals. Midwives had more MLE training and hands-on experience than obstetricians (p < 0.01). At the end of the programme, the mean values of the three main parameters of MLE were significantly improved in most perinatal care providers. Moreover, midwives, particularly senior midwives, benefited more after the programme, with the incision length and accuracy of MLE improved significantly (P < 0.01).
conclusionsOperative obstetric simulation training with appropriate instructions should be advocated. Both junior and senior perinatal care providers can benefit from the educational programme. Senior midwives may particularly benefit in their respective fields.
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.