ArticleScientific reports2025
Surgeon perceptions of essential skills and simulation for percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy training.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study sought to identify the procedural competencies deemed necessary by Chinese surgeons for performing percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED), and to assess the current landscape of its simulated training. The survey, comprising 38 items and developed by PTED experts, was distributed via five dedicated social media groups for spine surgeons and at two major orthopaedic surgery conferences, targeting surgeons with experience in PTED. A total of 154 valid responses were received from surgeons across 22 of China's 34 provincial-level administrative divisions (64.7% coverage). Cognitive skills were identified as the most critical for performing PTED. Although cadaveric specimens were the preferred training modality, younger surgeons reported limited access to them. High-fidelity physical models and virtual reality (VR) simulators were regarded as the most favorable alternatives. The reported average duration of simulated training was 22.8 ± 43.6 h. A solid anatomical foundation is critical for novice surgeons to achieve proficiency in PTED. While cadaveric training remains the ideal modality, high-fidelity physical models and VR simulators are viable and increasingly accessible alternatives for training the next generation of surgeons.
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.