Trial reportJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews2025
Validity Assessment of a Three-Dimensional Printed Arthroscopic Shoulder Simulator: An Experimental Evaluation of Construct Validity and Educational Value.
Trial report in Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo solve barriers to simulation-based training of residents, we have developed a three-dimensional (3D) printed anatomic shoulder simulator that is low cost and deployable worldwide. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the educational and construct validity of a novel 3D-printed shoulder simulator (3DP) for arthroscopy of the shoulder and compare it to a commercially available shoulder simulator (control).
methodsIn this institutional review board-approved randomized controlled trial, 20 participants were divided into four groups: five senior medical students and five expert surgeons for each simulator. Participants completed four arthroscopic tasks, which were videorecorded and assessed using the Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool (ASSET) and time to task completion. Pre- and posttask anatomy tests were also administered.
resultsThe expert surgeon group was faster to complete arthroscopic tasks than the medical student group for both the control (P = 0.003) and 3DP (P = 0.046). The ASSET scores were markedly higher for expert surgeons versus medical students on the 3DP (P = 0.017), with no difference on the control (P = 0.533). After task completion, medical students improved scores on an anatomy test from an average of 52% to a 76% on the control and from 52% to 84% on the 3DP.
conclusionThe 3D printed arthroscopic shoulder simulator demonstrated construct validity based on time and ASSET scores, while also demonstrating educational value. The commercially available shoulder simulator demonstrated construct validity based on time; however, it was not able to differentiate skill level based on arthroscopic skills assessment.
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.