No significant differences found between virtual reality training and simulation training in GOALS scores or time to completion¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2022 · 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.
q3 i? Meta-analysis found total GOALS scores favoured neither VRT nor ST (MD −5.23, 95%CI −11.64 to 1.18, P = 0.11) and time to completion favoured neither (MD −1.43, 95%CI −4.43 to 1.52, P = 0.34). → Humm Gemma; Mohan Helen Peter; Fleming Christina; Harries Rhiannon; Wood Christopher; Dawas Khaled; Stoyanov Danail; Lovat Laurence B 2022
Evidence¶
Humm Gemma; Mohan Helen Peter; Fleming Christina; Harries Rhiannon; Wood Christopher; Dawas Khaled; Stoyanov Danail; Lovat Laurence B 2022¶
Humm Gemma; Mohan Helen Peter; Fleming Christina; Harries Rhiannon; Wood Christopher; Dawas Khaled; Stoyanov Danail; Lovat Laurence B. (2022). The impact of virtual reality simulation training on operative performance in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. BJS Open. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrac086
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3
Meta-analysis of two RCTs comparing VR training with simulation training on time to completion, 47 participants per arm, low heterogeneity (I2 = 28 per cent), fixed-effects model favouring neither, "MD −1.43, 95 per cent c.i. −4.43 to 1.52, P = 0.34". A separate two-study GOALS meta-analysis also favoured neither (P = 0.11).
"In a meta-analysis of two studies8,47, 47 participants were randomized to VR training and 47 to ST. Statistical heterogeneity was low (I2 = 28 per cent). Using a fixed-effects model, the combined weighted effect favoured neither VRT nor ST (MD −1.43, 95 per cent c.i. −4.43 to 1.52, P = 0.34)"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Virtual reality training shows no significant improvement in total GOALS scores or GOALS domains compared with no additional training — related
- Virtual reality training improves OSATS scores compared with no additional training for junior trainees in laparoscopic cholecystectomy — related
- Virtual reality training reduces time to completion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy tasks compared with no additional training — related
- Virtual reality training reduces intraoperative error counts compared with no additional training in laparoscopic cholecystectomy — related
- Robotic novices trained with extended reality simulators complete tasks significantly faster than novices with no additional training — related
- Virtual reality training improves economy-of-movement and error global rating scores compared with no additional training in one RCT — related
- Extended reality training shows no statistically significant difference in time to complete compared to dry lab training — related
- Haptic virtual reality simulation reduces procedural time for pulpotomy training compared with conventional simulators — related
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.