ArticleEuropean urology open science2026
Consensus-informed Development of Scoring Systems for Intermediate Laparoscopic Simulation Modules: An ESU Laparoscopic Workgroup Initiative.
Article in European urology open science, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: Competency-based and standardised surgical training has become essential in urological education. The European School of Urology (ESU) established the Standardisation in Surgical Education initiative to develop a validated, competency-based surgical training. The ESU Laparoscopic Workgroup aims to develop two intermediate-level laparoscopic simulation modules, Partial Nephrectomy (PN) and Major Vessel Injury (MVI), and develop standardised performance metrics and scoring criteria for the intermediate laparoscopic ESU curriculum. Design setting and participants: Modules were evaluated during hands-on training courses across multiple European congresses. PN was completed by 27 participants (four experts, 23 residents); MVI by 41 participants (29 experts and 12 residents). Predefined performance parameters were derived from a previously published Delphi consensus defining the ESU Laparoscopic Urological Skills 2 curriculum and included procedure time, tissue handling, technical precision, completeness of resection/closure, haemostasis, and functional outcome. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Completion times were assessed using the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables. Qualitative performance parameters were recorded as criterion-referenced educational indicators and summarised descriptively. Observed performance patterns, together with expert consensus, were used to inform the development of candidate scoring frameworks. Results: Experts completed both modules in shorter median times compared with residents, for both modules (PN: 21:36 [interquartile range {IQR} 17:49-26:21] min vs 42:00 [IQR 36:35-43:26] min, Conclusions: This study supports the feasibility and educational relevance of two intermediate laparoscopic simulation modules within the ESU LUS2 curriculum. Building on a previously established Delphi consensus and informed by observed performance patterns, we propose preliminary, consensus-informed scoring frameworks intended to guide structured assessment and feedback. These findings should be regarded as a foundational step toward future validation and refinement in larger cohorts prior to formal implementation.
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.