Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2026
Laparoscopic suturing training using positive or negative feedback: A randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSimulation-based training (SBT) relies heavily on feedback to optimize skill acquisition. While prior studies suggest both positive and negative feedback enhance immediate performance, their effects on skill acquisition and motivational implications remain underexplored.
methodsThis randomized controlled trial recruited 42 laparoscopic-naïve medical students, stratified into three groups: positive feedback (emotional encouragement), negative feedback (critical remarks), and no feedback. Participants were assessed at baseline using the intracorporeal suturing assessment tool (ISAT), followed by 2 h of standardized training. One week after training, skill retention was reassessed using ISAT, and motivation was measured using the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI) with seven items (I).
resultsBoth feedback groups demonstrated significant skill improvement (positive: 76.8% ΔISAT, p < 0.001; negative: 62.0% ΔISAT, p < 0.001) versus controls (11.2% ΔISAT, p = 0.12). Positive feedback recipients reported higher perceived competence (IMI I4: 5.3 vs 3.6, p = 0.029; IMI I6: 6.2 vs 4.5, p = 0.039) and lower pressure/tension (I2: 2.6 vs 4.3, p = 0.005) compared to negative counterparts. In addition, the perceived competence of trainees was positively correlated with interest/emotion and negatively correlated with pressure/tension in the positive feedback group, while the perceived competence of trainees was positively correlated with pressure/tension in negative feedback group.
conclusionBoth positive and negative feedback are superior to the absence of feedback in enhancing laparoscopic surgical skills. Positive feedback outperforms negative feedback in terms of skill improvement. Participants receiving negative feedback caused more tissue injuries during suturing. Moreover, positive feedback can enhance the intrinsic motivation and self-confidence of trainees in practicing their skills compared to negative feedback.
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.