To investigate the correlation in performance of cataract surgery between a virtual-reality simulator and real-life surgery using two objective assessment tools with evidence of validity.
Cataract surgeons with varying levels of experience were included in the study. All participants performed and videorecorded three standard cataract surgeries before completing a proficiency-based test on the EyeSi virtual-reality simulator. Standard cataract surgeries were defined as: (1) surgery performed under local anaesthesia, (2) patient age >60 years, and (3) visual acuity >1/60 preoperatively. A motion-tracking score was calculated by multiplying average path length and average number of movements from the three real-life surgical videos of full procedures. The EyeSi test consisted of five abstract and two procedural modules: intracapsular navigation, antitremor training, intracapsular antitremor training, forceps training, bimanual training, capsulorhexis and phaco divide and conquer.
Eleven surgeons were enrolled. After a designated warm-up period, the proficiency-based test on the EyeSi simulator was strongly correlated to real-life performance measured by motion-tracking software of cataract surgical videos with a Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.70 (p = 0.017).
Performance on the EyeSi simulator is significantly and highly correlated to real-life surgical performance. However, it is recommended that performance assessments are made using multiple data sources.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2021.
All research outputs
#10,795,106
of 34,559,526 outputs
Outputs from Acta Ophthalmologica (1755375X)
#604
of 2,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,464
of 335,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Ophthalmologica (1755375X)
#9
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,559,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,571 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,232 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
