Trial reportRevista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes2026
Validation of a synthetic lumbar spinal endoscopy simulator: skills transfer to real surgery.
Trial report in Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes, 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
introductionSurgical simulators offer substantial benefits for technical skills training by providing a risk-free environment for practice. However, access to effective simulators in surgical education remains limited. This study aimed to validate a synthetic lumbar spinal endoscopy simulator through skills transfer and assess its educational applicability.
methodsForty medical students were randomized to simulator training (n=20) or control (n=20). After training, all performed supervised diagnostic endoscopy. Procedures were recorded and evaluated by a blinded examiner for total time, look-downs, instrument loss, supervisor interventions, and Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills (GOALS). A Likert-scale questionnaire assessed perceptions of simulation training.
resultsThe intervention group showed superior performance, with reductions of 43.7% in procedure time, 85.3% in look-downs, 75.9% in interventions, 93.3% in instrument loss duration, and 91.2% in total loss percentage (p<0.001). GOALS scores were significantly higher in all domains (p<0.001). All participants endorsed incorporating simulation into medical education.
conclusionThe simulator demonstrated strong transfer validity, significantly improving surgical performance. GOALS scores tripled among simulator-trained participants, and acceptance of the simulator for educational use was unanimous..
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.