ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Hand-specific speed and accuracy optimization during early endoscopic forceps training: a comparative study of surgical aspirants and non-aspirants.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn endoscopic surgery, safe performance depends on functionally distinct roles of the dominant and non-dominant hands. However, skill acquisition is often evaluated using uniform, time-based metrics, which may obscure hand-specific learning patterns-particularly improvements in non-dominant-hand stability and accuracy.
objectiveTo compare dominant- and non-dominant-hand learning patterns during a two-week endoscopic forceps training program between medical students with and without surgical career aspiration, focusing on speed-accuracy trade-offs and learning-direction transitions.
methodsFourth-year medical students completed a standardized dry-lab forceps transfer task over two weeks. Participants were stratified by surgical aspiration (aspirants vs non-aspirants). For each hand, weekly mean completion time and error rate were calculated. Each student-week was classified into one of four speed-accuracy profiles using fixed pooled-median cutoffs, and Week 1→Week 2 transitions were summarized using 4×4 transition tables. Group differences were further examined using ANCOVA for mean time and weighted regression for error-rate change.
resultsAmong surgical aspirants, dominant-hand performance improved mainly in speed: Week 2 mean time was shorter than in non-aspirants (mean difference -15.1 s, 95% CI -19.4 to -10.8; p<0.001). In contrast, non-dominant-hand improvement was mainly in accuracy: Week 2 error rate was lower in surgical aspirants (mean difference -0.15, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.11; p<0.001) and the reduction in error rate (Δ error rate, Week 2-Week 1) was greater (mean difference -0.11, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.08; p<0.001). Four-category transition analyses showed a prominent shift toward lower-error profiles for the non-dominant hand in surgical aspirants. These patterns persisted after adjustment for total hand-specific practice volume and age.
conclusionsAmong novice medical students, early performance during this two-week dry-laboratory forceps task showed hand-specific patterns: dominant-hand improvement was expressed mainly through speed, whereas non-dominant-hand improvement was expressed mainly through accuracy. These task-specific findings require validation in surgical trainees, higher-fidelity tasks, and longer-term follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42675302What 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.