ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2026
From Innovation to Implementation: A Scoping Review of Simulation in Otolaryngology Education.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To systematically map the otolaryngology simulation literature according to learner stage, primary educational objective, and depth of outcome measurement, and to propose a structured implementation framework for integrating emerging technologies and developing standardized, national simulation curricula. Methods: A scoping review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies published from January 2010 through August 2026 describing simulation used for education, training, or assessment in otolaryngology. Included studies were charted across three domains: learner stage (medical students, residents, practicing otolaryngologists), primary educational objective (exposure, acquisition, refinement, assessment), and outcome depth (face/content validity, pre-post or construct validity, behavior/clinical correlation). Evidence from adjacent surgical specialties and emerging technologies was synthesized narratively to inform a stepwise implementation framework. Results: Of 9081 records identified, 979 unique studies met inclusion criteria, yielding 1142 learner entries. Simulation efforts were heavily concentrated in resident education (56.0% of learner entries) and skill acquisition (53.0%), with skill refinement concentrated among practicing otolaryngologists and almost no studies designed primarily for assessment. Face or content validity remained the most common highest measured outcome (53.7%); behavior-level outcomes were rare (1.1%). These distributions demonstrate insufficient alignment between learner stage, educational intent, and validation depth. Lessons from adjacent surgical specialties, together with emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and extended reality, offer a practical pathway toward scalable, objective assessment. Conclusions: Otolaryngology is poised to advance simulation education beyond historically fragmented initiatives toward a deliberately designed simulation ecosystem aligned with learner level, educational intent, and outcome depth. A coordinated national framework that leverages emerging technologies while building on existing infrastructure, implemented through phased pilot programs and attentive to cost, faculty, and technical barriers, can position the field as a leader in surgical education.
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.