ArticleCureus2026
Development and Validation of a New Assessment Tool for Simulation-Based Training in Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Venous Catheterization.
Article in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Establishing intravenous access is a common clinical procedure, yet peripheral venous catheter placement can be challenging in certain patient populations. Using ultrasound improves success rates but remains operator-dependent and requires training. Simulation-based training enhances procedural skills without risk to patients but requires a standardized measure of the acquired skills. This study presents and validates a new assessment tool for simulation-based training in ultrasound-guided peripheral venous catheterization, enabling safe transition from simulation to clinical implementation. Methods This exploratory, rater-blinded study recruited participants from two Danish university hospitals. Participants were allocated to one of two groups according to experience level. Each participant performed three ultrasound-guided peripheral venous catheter placements on a phantom. All attempts were video recorded and rated by two blinded raters using the new assessment tool. Validity evidence was examined using Messick's framework, focusing on content validity, response process, internal structure, relationships to other variables, and consequences of testing. Results Fifty participants were enrolled, of whom 46 were included in the final analysis. Internal consistency was high, with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.85. The tool effectively discriminated between novices and experienced participants (p < 0.001). A pass/fail score of 18 points was established, with a false-negative rate of 4.5% and a false-positive rate of 12.5%. Conclusion We found the new assessment tool valid and reliable, effectively distinguishing novices from experienced participants and setting a passing cutoff score. This supports its use in simulation-based training to standardize competence evaluation, serving as a gateway to subsequent assessment in clinical practice.
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.