Trial reportThe Permanente journal2025
Assessing Best Practices in a Simulated Lumbar Puncture Workshop With Medical Students.
Trial report in The Permanente journal, 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.
- Training and assessment of skills in neuraxial space access: a scoping review of educational approaches to lumbar puncture, epidural anaesthesia, and spinal anaesthesia.British journal of anaesthesia · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSimulation labs provide trainees the opportunity to practice procedures in a safe, controlled, nonjudgmental environment. It is unclear which teaching method leads to the highest levels of trainee skill competency when learning complex simulated procedures, such as lumbar puncture.
methodsFirst-year medical students participated in a randomized controlled trial of an early-exposure simulated lumbar puncture (sLP) workshop. All were randomized to 1 of 2 teaching methods: 1) traditional "see one, do one" method or 2) Peyton's 4-step method. Students were taught how to perform an sLP based on the specific teaching method. Competence during sLP attempts was assessed using binary checklists, and student confidence was assessed using pre- and post-workshop surveys. Independent
resultsThirty-five first-year medical students participated in the sLP workshops. There were no statistically significant differences between the "see one, do one" method and Peyton's 4-step teaching method in checklist scores ( DISCUSSION: In this study, the traditional "see one, do one" model and Peyton's 4-step approach produced similar skill acquisition and confidence levels among medical students during an sLP workshop. Peyton's 4-step approach led to faster procedural completion times.
conclusionThe current study adds to the body of literature that has failed to find a notable impact in skill competence outcomes when teaching complex procedures.
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.