ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2026
Comparative experience of phaco-I and kitaro eye models among ophthalmology trainees in Malaysia: A preliminary study.
Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the user experience of Phaco-I and Kitaro among Malaysian ophthalmology trainees during phacoemulsification simulation. Secondary objectives included the preliminary validation of a questionnaire designed to assess internal consistency in simulation-based surgical training.
designCross-sectional questionnaire-based study.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted among 19 ophthalmology trainees participating in a phacoemulsification workshop. Each participant used both the Phaco-I and Kitaro, and then completed a 28-item validated questionnaire. The questionnaire comprised 20 items rated using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 5 = Strongly Agree), two items assessing model preference, and six open-ended questions to obtain qualitative feedback. Data were analysed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and Cronbach's alpha was calculated for reliability.
resultsKitaro scored significantly higher than Phaco-I across most domains, including surgical realism (median 4.00 vs 3.40, P = 0.011), skill development (median 4.25 vs 3.25, P = 0.002), confidence and skill transfer (median 4.00 vs 3.33, P = 0.0003), and overall experience (median 4.67 vs 3.00, P = 0.0003). Questionnaire reliability was excellent with Cronbach alpha coefficients exceeding 0.878. However, the interpretation of findings is limited by the small sample size.
conclusionIn this preliminary study, the Kitaro was perceived as offering a more realistic simulation experience for phacoemulsification training compared to Phaco-I. These findings highlight the potential utility of Kitaro for advanced simulation training among Malaysian ophthalmology trainees. Further studies with larger samples are needed to confirm these findings.
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.