The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Virtual reality training in laparoscopic surgery: A systematic review & meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic surgery requires a different and sometimes more complex skill set than does open surgery. Shortened working hours, less training times, and patient safety issues necessitates that these skills need to be acquired outside the operating room. Virtual reality simulation in laparoscopic surgery is a growing field, and many studies have been published to determine its effectiveness. AIMS: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate virtual reality simulation in laparoscopic abdominal surgery in comparison to other simulation models and to no training. METHODS: A systematic literature search was carried out until January 2014 in full adherence to PRISMA guidelines. All randomised controlled studies comparing virtual reality training to other models of training or to no training were included. Only studies utilizing objective and validated assessment tools were included. RESULTS: Thirty one randomised controlled trials that compare virtual reality training to other models of training or to no training were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that virtual reality simulation is significantly more effective than video trainers, and at least as good as box trainers. CONCLUSION: The use of Proficiency-based VR training, under supervision with prompt instructions and feedback, and the use of haptic feedback, has proven to be the most effective way of delivering the virtual reality training. The incorporation of virtual reality training into surgical training curricula is now necessary. A unified platform of training needs to be established. Further studies to assess the impact on patient outcomes and on hospital costs are necessary. (PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42014010030).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & the PRISMA Group* (2009) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · Cited by 37,554
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048
Cited by
The potential of immersive virtual reality to enhance learning: A meta-analysis
Coban, M., Bolat, Y. I., & Goksu, I. (2022) · Educational Research Review · doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100452 · Cited by 354
Lungu, A. J., Swinkels, W., Claesen, L., Tu, P., Egger, J., & Chen, X. (2021) · Expert Review of Medical Devices · doi:10.1080/17434440.2021.1860750 · Cited by 269
Virtual Reality in Medical Students’ Education: Scoping Review
Jiang, H., Vimalesvaran, S., Wang, J. K., Lim, K. B., Mogali, S. R., & Car, L. T. (2022) · JMIR Medical Education · doi:10.2196/34860 · Cited by 259
A review of the evidence for training effectiveness with virtual reality technology
Abich, J., Parker, J., Murphy, J. S., & Eudy, M. (2021) · Virtual Reality · doi:10.1007/s10055-020-00498-8 · Cited by 253
Xin, B., Huang, X., Wan, W., Lv, K., Hu, Y., Wang, J., Li, S., Zou, W., Xiao, J., & Liu, T. (2020) · International Orthopaedics · doi:10.1007/s00264-020-04488-y · Cited by 58
Metadata
- Authors
- Alaker, M., Wynn, G. R., & Arulampalam, T.
- Venue
- International Journal of Surgery
- Published
- 2016-05
- Volume
- 29
- Pages
- 85-94
- ISSN
- 1743-9159 (ISSN-L)
- 1743-9191
- OpenAlex
- W2301885180
- Cited by
- 368
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Virtual reality training in laparoscopic surgery: A systematic review & meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.03.034
- The paper
- Alaker, M., Wynn, G. R., & Arulampalam, T. (2016). Virtual reality training in laparoscopic surgery: A systematic review & meta-analysis. International Journal of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.03.034
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.