A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Current Status of Simulation-based Training Tools in Orthopedic Surgery: A Systematic Review. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • - The study aimed to systematically review orthopedic training and assessment simulators, focusing on their level of evidence (LoE) and recommendation levels based on evidence in education.
  • - Researchers reviewed 76 relevant articles and found that most studies were centered on knee arthroscopy simulators, which often included validation studies demonstrating decent LoE, particularly in arthroscopy.
  • - While there has been an increase in validation studies for orthopedic simulators, the overall LoE is still low, and the research lacks attention to nontechnical skills and cost-effectiveness of these training tools.

Article Abstract

Objective: To conduct a systematic review of orthopedic training and assessment simulators with reference to their level of evidence (LoE) and level of recommendation.

Design: Medline and EMBASE library databases were searched for English language articles published between 1980 and 2016, describing orthopedic simulators or validation studies of these models. All studies were assessed for LoE, and each model was subsequently awarded a level of recommendation using a modified Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification, adapted for education.

Results: A total of 76 articles describing orthopedic simulators met the inclusion criteria, 47 of which described at least 1 validation study. The most commonly identified models (n = 34) and validation studies (n = 26) were for knee arthroscopy. Construct validation was the most frequent validation study attempted by authors. In all, 62% (47 of 76) of the simulator studies described arthroscopy simulators, which also contained validation studies with the highest LoE.

Conclusions: Orthopedic simulators are increasingly being subjected to validation studies, although the LoE of such studies generally remain low. There remains a lack of focus on nontechnical skills and on cost analyses of orthopedic simulators.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2017.01.005DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

orthopedic simulators
16
validation studies
16
systematic review
8
describing orthopedic
8
validation study
8
validation
7
studies
7
orthopedic
6
simulators
6
current status
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!