ArticleBMC medical education2026
Assessment of surgical skills on a novel expert-informed immersive virtual reality simulator for distal radius fracture fixation: a cross-sectional validation study.
Article 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCompetency-based medical education requires structured training and valid methods for assessing technical proficiency. Virtual reality simulators offer objective, reproducible assessments but often rely on developer-defined metrics lacking transparency and robust validity evidence. This study aimed to collect validity evidence, guided by Messick’s unified validity framework, for a novel, expert-informed, immersive virtual reality simulator designed to assess proficiency among orthopedic physicians for volar plate fixation of distal radius fractures.
methodsTwelve orthopedic residents (novices) and eleven experienced orthopedic surgeons completed one distal radius fracture fixation in the simulator. Performance was evaluated using 32 simulator metrics addressing technical proficiency, imaging accuracy, and procedural errors. Simulator metrics were compared between the two groups individually (secondary outcomes) and combined into a composite total simulator score (primary outcome). Validity evidence was structured according to Messick’s framework. The composite score’s discriminatory ability was assessed using the Contrasting Groups’ Method.
resultsExperienced surgeons significantly outperformed novices on nine of 32 simulator metrics, while the novices scored higher on one. After excluding this construct-irrelevant metric, the remaining 31 metrics demonstrated acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.79). The total simulator score was significantly different for the two groups: novices scored − 1.6 points (CI -12.3 to 9.2), and experienced surgeons scored 61.9 points (CI 53.6 to 70.3), p < .001. A discriminatory standard for the total simulator score of 34.0 points completely discriminated between novices and experienced surgeons.
conclusionThis study provides comprehensive validity evidence – covering all five sources in Messick’s framework – for a newly developed, expert-informed, immersive virtual reality simulator for distal radius fracture fixation. The simulator-based assessment reliably discriminated between novices and experienced orthopedic surgeons. These findings support the simulator’s utility for objective skills assessment in distal radius fracture fixation within orthopedic residency 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.