Claims

Multimodal feedback systems produced greater simulator score improvements than conventional feedback in basic robotic skills training

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? In the CESIR randomised study reported by the review, simulator scores improved from 64 to 91 with multimodal feedback versus 63 to 79 with conventional feedback (p < 0.05). → Shakir T 2026

Evidence

Shakir T 2026

Shakir T, Lingam G, Boal M, Francis N, Chand M. (2026). Technology-enhanced training in basic robotic surgical skills: a systematic review. Journal of Robotic Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-026-03633-w

q2 · i? · causal · r2

The review reports a randomised study of 60 robotic novices allocated to CESIR multimodal feedback (cameras plus force/pressure sensors enabling retrospective visualisation of hand-foot kinematics) or conventional feedback after two simulator tasks. The quoted score improvements are from that study.

"Simulator scores showed a greater improvement in the CESIR group from 64 to 91, whereas the conventional group improved from 63 to 79 (p < 0.05)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.