Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2026
Comparing skill transfer and cognitive style effects across three laparoscopic training modalities: a prospective randomized study in medical students.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSimulation-based training is an important component of modern surgical education. While virtual reality (VR) simulators, box trainers, and serious games are all used in laparoscopic training, comparative data on their effectiveness, transferability, and the role of individual cognitive learning styles remain limited.
methodsIn this prospective, randomized study, 80 medical students without prior laparoscopic experience were assigned to one of four groups: VR simulator, box trainer, serious game, or control. Each group received four one-hour training sessions. Cognitive style was assessed using the Object-Spatial Imagery and Verbal Questionnaire (OSIVQ), and all participants completed standardized pre- and post-tests on a VR simulator. Performance was evaluated using z-scores for efficiency, accuracy, and task completion.
resultsAll intervention groups demonstrated significant performance improvements. The VR group showed the greatest gains, particularly in complex tasks such as "Fine Dissection" and "Clip Applying". Box trainer training led to marked reductions in error rates. The serious game group primarily improved in basic skills but showed limited transfer to complex tasks. Spatial learners outperformed other cognitive styles across all modalities, whereas verbal learners improved significantly only in the VR group.
conclusionAll three simulation modalities support laparoscopic skill acquisition, but their effectiveness varies by task complexity and cognitive profile. VR training appears to be the most inclusive and effective, particularly for learners with non-spatial cognitive styles. These findings support the integration of cognitive profiling and task-specific modality selection into surgical training.
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.