Claims

Open hernia repair simulation models lack evidence of educational impact, with fewer validity assessments than laparoscopic models

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2024: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

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? Of the six open hernia repair simulation models reviewed, none demonstrated educational impact in addition to assessing validity. → Pelly T. 2021 q2 i? There were fewer attempts to measure educational impact in open than in laparoscopic hernia repair models. → Pelly T. 2021

Evidence

Pelly T. 2021

Pelly T., Vance-Daniel J., Linder C. (2021). Characteristics of laparoscopic and open hernia repair simulation models: a systematic review. Hernia. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8251686/

q2 · i? · review · r2

Systematic review synthesis across the six open hernia repair models identified (silicon, animal and VR types); the review reports "fewer attempts to measure educational impact in the open hernia repair models than the laparoscopic models". The abstract states none of the six demonstrated educational impact.

"There were fewer attempts to measure educational impact in the open hernia repair models than the laparoscopic models."

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.