ArticleHNO2026
[Simulation-based competency assessment : Development and evaluation of a realistic model for minor tympanic membrane surgery].
Article in HNO, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundObjective assessment of surgical skills remains challenging due to informal, non-standardized formats. Simulation enables controlled evaluation. In otologic surgery, myringotomy with tube placement is a suitable standard procedure.
objectiveThis work aimed to develop and evaluate a simulation-based model of minor tympanic membrane surgery in terms of acceptance and suitability for differentiated and standardized skill assessment. MATERIALS AND
methodsA realistic model was developed and evaluated by 31 ENT physicians of varying experience. A pilot study with 20 medical students (group A) and 10 senior ENT specialists (group E) was conducted using standardized criteria.
resultsThe model was positively rated across experience levels. Group E achieved 100%, while group A showed more variability. No significant differences were found in terms of orientation, technique, structure, or hygiene. Tube placement accuracy differed significantly (group A 50% vs. group E 100%).
conclusionThe model offers realistic simulation and shows strong potential for competency-based training and valid 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.