ArticleInternational ophthalmology2026
Construct validity of five phacoemulsification modules on the EyeSi surgical simulator: a cross-sectional study across three levels of surgical expertise.
Article in International 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
purposeVirtual reality simulators are increasingly integrated into cataract surgery training to facilitate skill acquisition outside the operating room. However, their educational value depends on the validity of simulated tasks. This study aimed to evaluate the construct validity of five procedural phacoemulsification modules on the EyeSi simulator (version 3.10.67) across three levels of surgical expertise.
methodsThis cross-sectional comparative study was conducted at a tertiary referral hospital and a university simulation center in Morocco. Twenty-five participants were stratified into novices (n = 17), advanced residents (n = 4), and expert surgeons (n = 4). Participants completed five EyeSi phacoemulsification modules, and performance metrics were compared across groups.
resultsOverall simulator performance improved with increasing surgical experience. Total scores differed significantly between groups (p = 0.005), with median values of 311, 365, and 473 for novices, advanced residents, and experts, respectively. Total completion time also differed significantly (p = 0.047). At the module level, construct validity was demonstrated for capsulorhexis (p = 0.030), divide and conquer (p = 0.009), and intraocular lens (IOL) insertion (p = 0.002), whereas hydrodissection and irrigation/aspiration did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.084 and p = 0.053, respectively).
conclusionsIn a recent EyeSi software version, construct validity was confirmed for three of the five evaluated procedural modules across three levels of surgical expertise. Complementary analyses further supported an association between simulator performance and surgical experience across all modules. These findings reinforce the educational value of the EyeSi simulator while highlighting the need for the continuous evaluation and refinement of individual procedural modules and their scoring algorithms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42726347What 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.