Trial reportBMC medical education2026
Preliminary exploration and evaluation of video-based feedback for orthokeratology lens fitting: a pilot study.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the application effect of the video-based feedback teaching method in the practical teaching of orthokeratology lens fitting.
methodsTwenty-three optometry interns were assigned via stratified randomization to an experimental group (video-based feedback, n = 12) and a control group (traditional verbal feedback, n = 11). Both groups received identical theoretical lectures led by the same instructor. The experimental group’s practice sessions were video recorded with structured feedback provided. Assessments included theoretical examinations, practical skill assessments and questionnaires. Independent sample t-tests and Mann–Whitney U tests were used to compare theoretical examination scores, practical skill assessments, and questionnaire results between the two groups to evaluate the teaching effectiveness. Theoretical examinations tested cognitive understanding of orthokeratology principles. Practical skills were evaluated using standardized assessments focusing on fluorescence evaluation techniques. Students completed questionnaires assessing course experience and metacognitive awareness.
resultsTheoretical knowledge scores showed no significant difference between groups (P = 0.060); however, the experimental group achieved a significantly higher pass rate (100.0% vs. 45.5%, Fisher’s exact test, P = 0.004). The experimental group achieved significantly higher practical skills scores (90.33 ± 6.29 vs. 81.91 ± 7.94; P = 0.010), particularly in static fluorescence evaluation (median 32, IQR: 29.5–36 vs. median 30, IQR: 21–32; P = 0.027) and dynamic fluorescence evaluation (median 14, IQR: 12–14 vs. median 10, IQR: 7–12; P = 0.004). The experimental group also demonstrated significantly higher satisfaction in self-awareness of performance (P = 0.048), perceived course helpfulness (P = 0.014), detail of practical demonstration (P = 0.008), and timeliness of instructor guidance (P = 0.019).
conclusionThis pilot study provides preliminary evidence that video-based feedback effectively enhances orthokeratology fitting skills and promotes reflective learning, offering a practical approach for clinical skills education in optometry. Future studies with larger sample sizes and long-term follow-up are warranted.
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.