ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2026
High-Fidelity Simulation for Assessing Catheterization-Based Skills Among Trainees.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Simulation-based training for coronary angiography has not been widely adopted, and an operator's skillset should be accurately reflected in a simulation-based task. The purpose of this study is to determine whether increasing levels of clinical experience were associated with improved performance and whether trainees' confidence improved with use of a high-fidelity simulator. Methods: Physicians with different catheterization experience (internal medicine residents, first- through third-year cardiology fellows, interventional fellows, and attending interventional cardiologists) performed multiple coronary artery catheter engagements on a high-fidelity endovascular simulator. The primary outcome was coronary engagement time (from the ascending aorta to coronary). Trainees completed presimulation and postsimulation surveys assessing confidence in catheter engagement (10-point Likert scale: 1, no confidence; 10, supreme confidence). Results: Across 240 catheter engagements by 24 physicians, median coronary engagement time was 37 seconds (IQR, 22-64). Engagement times were longer on the right coronary artery (42 seconds [22-70]) than on the left (34 seconds [21-56]; Conclusions: Using a high-fidelity simulator, increasing operator experience was associated with less time to coronary catheter engagement. Simulation was associated with a significant increase in trainee confidence in performing coronary catheter engagement.
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.