ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2025
Current State of Simulation in Interventional Cardiology Training: Results of a SCAI Survey.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-Fidelity Simulation for Assessing Catheterization-Based Skills Among Trainees.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- A fellows first night on call: managing the chaos in the storm.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Prevention and Management of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention-Related Complications: Assessing the Impact of Simulation-Based Learning and Human Factors Training.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Advanced Computer Simulation Based on Cardiac Imaging in Planning of Structural Heart Disease Interventions.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Interventional cardiology (IC) is well suited to simulation education, with a wide spectrum of digital and physical models for procedural training. Despite this, standardization, validation, and access to simulation training remains inconsistent in the United States and globally. Ten years have elapsed since the last Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) expert consensus statement on simulation in IC, which included a survey of US program directors. In this document, we report the results of a follow-up survey with the goal of broadening polling to all career stages, both in the US and internationally. Methods: A web-based 19-item survey with embedded subquestions was sent out via email solicitation to SCAI members from September 2023 to December 2023. Results: In total, 420 responses were collected, with a 15% response rate. Nearly 70% of respondents were from the US. There was equal distribution in responses for all stages of training, with most respondents performing coronary procedures. Two-thirds had previous exposure to simulation training with most using digital simulators and reporting only 1 to 2 days of exposure for each type or procedure. A majority (71%) felt that they had insufficient simulation training; most felt that simulation fidelity was average. The biggest barrier to simulation training was a lack of access. Conclusions: Despite efforts to develop simulation in IC training, there remain gaps in accessibility, exposure, and curricula. Professional organizations, industry, and educational governing bodies must collaborate on specific, actionable strategies to enhance access to high-fidelity IC simulation training globally.
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.