Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 327

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Simulation-Based Mastery Learning Improves Patient Outcomes in Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Zendejas, Benjamin, Cook, David A., Bingener, Juliane, Huebner, Marianne, Dunn, William F., Sarr, Michael G., Farley, David R.·2011·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a mastery learning, simulation-based curriculum for laparoscopic, totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair. BACKGROUND: Clinically relevant benefits from improvements in operative performance, time, and errors after simulation-based training are not clearly established. METHODS: After performing a baseline TEP in the OR, general surgery residents randomized to mastery learning (ML) or standard practice (SP) were reassessed during subsequent TEPs. The ML curriculum involved Web-based modules followed by training on a TEP simulator until expert performance was achieved. Operative time, performance, and patient outcomes adjusted for staff, resident participation, difficulty of repair, PGY-level, and patient comorbidities were compared between groups with mixed effects-ANOVA and generalized linear models. RESULTS: Fifty residents (PGY1-5) performed 219 TEP repairs on 146 patients. Baseline operative time, performance, and demographics were similar between groups. To achieve mastery, ML-residents (n = 26) required a median of 16 (range 7-27) simulated repairs. After training, TEPs performed by ML-residents were faster than those by SP-residents, with time corrected for participation (mean ± SD, 34 ± 8 minutes vs. 48 ± 14 minutes; difference -13; 95%CI, -18 to -8; P < 0.001). Operative performance scores (GOALS, scale 6-30) were better for ML residents (21.9 ± 2.8 vs. 18.3 ± 3.8; P = 0.001). Intraoperative complications (peritoneal tear, procedure conversion), postoperative complications (urinary retention, seroma), and need for overnight stay were less likely in the ML group (adjusted odds ratios 0.14, 0.04, and 0, respectively; all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A simulation-based ML curriculum decreased operative time, improved trainee performance, and decreased intra- and postoperative complications and overnight stays after laparoscopic TEP inguinal hernia repair. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01085500.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/sla.0b013e31822c6994

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 25 references

Cited by

See all 327

Metadata

Authors
Zendejas, B., Cook, D. A., Bingener, J., Huebner, M., Dunn, W. F., Sarr, M. G., & Farley, D. R.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2011-09
Volume
254
Issue
3
Pages
502-511
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1994075445
Cited by
327
References
25
FWCI
20.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Simulation-Based Mastery Learning Improves Patient Outcomes in Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Randomized Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/sla.0b013e31822c6994
The paper
Zendejas, B., Cook, D. A., Bingener, J., Huebner, M., Dunn, W. F., Sarr, M. G., & Farley, D. R. (2011). Simulation-Based Mastery Learning Improves Patient Outcomes in Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Annals of Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0b013e31822c6994

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.