ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2026
A pilot study evaluating a low-cost virtual reality simulator for transesophageal echocardiography training in anesthesiology residents.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 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
backgroundTransesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is an essential skill in perioperative and critical care practice. Traditional lecture-based instruction remains the standard for foundational training, but virtual reality (VR)-based platforms may enhance engagement and provide scalable, self-directed learning. This exploratory study evaluated the feasibility, educational impact, and learner satisfaction of a low-cost VR TEE training system for anesthesiology residents. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this randomized, single-center study, 19 anesthesiology residents (Post-Graduate Years 1-3) without prior TEE experience were assigned to lecture instruction or VR-based training. Participants completed baseline, immediate post-training, 1-month, and 3-month knowledge assessments evaluating TEE principles and clinical correlation. A post-training survey assessed satisfaction and perceived educational value.
resultsBoth groups showed improvement in knowledge scores with retention at 1 and 3 months. There were no significant differences in mean scores between groups (control vs. VR: baseline 14.4 ± 3.6 vs. 14.9 ± 4.2,
conclusionsA low-cost VR platform for TEE education is feasible and well received by trainees. Although knowledge outcomes were similar to lecture-based instruction, higher learner satisfaction supports VR as a valuable supplement to traditional methods, particularly in programs with limited access to high-fidelity simulators.
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.