ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2026
Validation of a high-fidelity simulator for diagnostic knee arthroscopy training.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To validate a high-fidelity arthroscopic simulator by assessing its construct, face and content validity for diagnostic knee arthroscopy training. Methods: Eighty-one participants (novices = 41, intermediates = 20 and experts = 20) performed a knee arthroscopy navigation task requiring identification of nine intra-articular landmarks, repeated for up to five trials with a 10-min limit per trial. Task-completion times and attrition were recorded. Performance was analysed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests with effect sizes. Post-task questionnaires evaluated face validity, content validity, educational value and user-friendliness. Results: Performance times differed significantly between experience groups ( Conclusions: This high-fidelity simulator demonstrated strong construct, face and content validity, reliably discriminating between experience levels and supporting early-phase skills acquisition. Strong realism and educational value ratings support its potential role in structured arthroscopic training, although usability findings highlight opportunities for ergonomic and instructional refinement. Future research should assess transfer validity and operative performance impact. Level of Evidence: Level III, prospective observational validation study.
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.