Claims

Only one included study assessed predictive validity, showing a curriculum including body donor lab sessions improved real-patient laparoscopic performance over conventional training

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · 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? Trainees in a curriculum including VR, cognitive and body donor components performed significantly better in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy on real patients than controls. → Pinar Sedat Alp 2025

Evidence

Pinar Sedat Alp 2025

Pinar Sedat Alp, Morrow Joseph J., Kong Chia Yew. (2025). A systematic review of the use of human body donor models for postgraduate laparoscopic surgical training. Anatomical Science International. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12565-025-00872-z

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review reports this as the only included study of predictive validity (Palter and Grantcharov 2012, 24 surgical residents, 18 post-intervention): a curriculum with VR simulator, cognitive training and body donor lab sessions versus the conventional residency pathway, with blinded senior-surgeon assessment on live operations. No effect size printed.

"trainees in the specific curriculum also performed significantly better in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy procedures on real patients, as assessed by senior surgeons during live operations that were blinded as to the randomisation of the residents."

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.