SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
The value of simulation for training general surgery novices in robotic surgery: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 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.
- Robotic vs Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy During the Early Training Phase: A Single Center Study.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
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
Simulation is the go-to option for robotic surgery education, though little is known about its impact on patient-related outcomes. The purpose of this review is to synthesize existing data on robotic simulations for training novice robotic general surgery residents and attendings associated with improved outcomes at Return on Investment (ROI) Levels 3-5 in comparison to no simulation training. The PRISMA-2020 Checklist was used to guide the reporting of the systematic review. A comprehensive search of 4 databases was performed using a combination of keywords and subject terms. Level 1 and 2 outcome papers, along with those not including general surgery residents or simulation as an intervention, were excluded. Data extraction and quality assessments were performed with findings synthesized in narrative themes. 1524 abstracts were imported into Covidence (a systematic review management software). Of those abstracts screened, 119 studies were selected for full-text screening, and a final set of nine studies met criteria for the review, including four studies with outcomes of ROI Level 3 and five studies with ROI Level 4. There were no Level 5 studies. Despite the increase in the use of simulation for robotic surgery training, there is limited evidence demonstrating the benefit of simulation on patient- and hospital-related outcomes. Synthesized data, although limited, points to a benefit in operating room time, cost, and blood loss. Future research should focus on conducting Level 5 studies to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of simulation in robotic surgery training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41205016What 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.