ArticleBMC medical education2025
"From simulation to surgery: exploring variables influencing the translational impact of simulation-based education in neurosurgical competence".
Article 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Education Research: Defining Competencies and Consensus in Canadian Epilepsy Fellowship Training: A Thematic Discourse Analysis of Expert Perspectives.Neurology. Education · 2026Article
- Preparing surgeons for the modern operating theatre: insights from a national survey on technology use and readiness.Frontiers in surgery · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSimulation-enhanced education (SEE) is increasingly integral to neurosurgical training, yet the mechanisms underpinning effective skill to clinical practice remain under-explored. This study, grounded in the Four-Component Instructional Design (4 C/ID) model and principles of deliberate practice investigates key variables influencing the translational impact of SEE on neurosurgical competence.
methodsA sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was employed. Quantitative data were collected via a 17-item questionnaire administered to neurosurgical residents and experts (n = 57), capturing domains such as instructional design, fidelity, skill transfer and assessment. Descriptive statistics, internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), and exploratory factor analysis were used to identify prevailing trends and subscales. These findings informed semi-structured interviews (n = 13), which probed underlying factors affecting skill transfer. Interview data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis, with themes mapped to quantitative constructs. Triangulation was achieved by integrating both data strands, and multiple researchers contributed to coding and analysis to enhance credibility.
resultsParticipants reported that SEE improved procedural confidence, technical competence, and task fluency. However, concerns persist around the realism of simulation, it’s applicability to complex clinical scenarios, and engagement among senior residents. Integration of quantitative and qualitative findings highlighted the value of simulation for procedural readiness and objective assessment, particularly when training design aligned with cognitive learning theory. Triangulation confirmed the robustness of emerging themes and provided a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing translational impact.
conclusionSEE supports the development of neurosurgical competence, particularly when grounded in robust instructional design and deliberate practice. Addressing challenges related to fidelity, transferability, and engagement will further the predictive validity and adaptive realism of neurosurgical simulation curricula.
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.