Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41835359›Full record

ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2026

VR Simulation-Based vs Traditional Apprenticeship Training in Gynecological Laparoscopy: A Comparative Survey of Residents' Expectations, Skills Acquisition, and Training Structure.

Antoni Sierant, Julia Bijok, Michal Pirozynski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Antoni SierantCenter for Endoscopy Simulation, Center of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7297-7991
Julia BijokCenter for Endoscopy Simulation, Center of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland.
Michal PirozynskiCenter for Endoscopy Simulation, Center of Postgraduate Medical Education, Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-3611-4328

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Simulation has emerged as a transformative method in surgical education, offering reproducible training in risk-free environments. While widely adopted in Western Europe and North America, traditional apprenticeship remains dominant in Central and Eastern Europe, raising concerns about skill acquisition and standardization. Objective: This study compared obstetrics and gynecology residents' perceptions of simulation-based versus apprenticeship laparoscopy training in Poland, focusing on expectations, skills acquisition, instructor engagement, and training structure. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 59 residents: 29 completed structured VR simulation-based courses and 30 participated in operating room apprenticeship. Data were collected using two course-specific questionnaires, from which nine comparable parameters were extracted. Chi-square tests were applied where distributions allowed; other items were analyzed descriptively. Results: Simulation participants reported significantly greater fulfillment of expectations (96.6% large/very large vs 6.7% apprenticeship; χ Conclusion: VR Simulation-based laparoscopy training was perceived as superior across expectations, skills acquisition, and structural factors. These findings, aligned with international literature, support integrating simulation as a mandatory component of gynecology residency curricula in Poland to improve both resident competence and patient safety.

Indexed as

apprenticeshipgynecologylaparoscopyresidency educationsimulation trainingsurgical skills

Identifiers

PMID41835359
PMCPMC12979360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.