Eyesi裂隙灯模拟器在眼科住院医师模拟培训课程中的验证：一项全国德尔菲研究。

IF 3.2 3区医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY

Ophthalmology and Therapy Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-04 DOI:10.1007/s40123-025-01175-2

Kasper Ruotsalainen Hansen, Simon Joel Lowater, Kristina Sanne Lyngsø, Anne Helene Køllund Nissen, Anna Stage Vergmann

{"title":"Eyesi裂隙灯模拟器在眼科住院医师模拟培训课程中的验证：一项全国德尔菲研究。","authors":"Kasper Ruotsalainen Hansen, Simon Joel Lowater, Kristina Sanne Lyngsø, Anne Helene Køllund Nissen, Anna Stage Vergmann","doi":"10.1007/s40123-025-01175-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Simulation-based training is increasingly used in medical education to improve clinical skills. The Eyesi slit lamp simulator offers a platform for training in slit lamp examination and indirect ophthalmoscopy. However, training needs to be evidence-based to ensure reliable evaluation. Therefore, this study aims to identify relevant training modules on the Eyesi slit lamp simulator for ophthalmology residents through a national Delphi study to develop a training curriculum.Methods: A two-round Delphi study was conducted with chief physicians, consultants, and professors involved in ophthalmology residency training across Denmark. In round one, experts evaluated the relevance of training modules on the Eyesi slit lamp simulator using a binary scale, and modules achieving ≥ 75% in relevance were included in round two. In round two, these modules were rated on a linear scale (1-5) for detailed assessment. Consensus was defined by a standard deviation (SD) < 1.0 and interquartile ranges (IQR) were calculated to assess variability and identify outliers.Results: A total of 11 experts participated in round one (response rate: 84.6%), and 8 experts participated in round two (response rate: 72.7%). In round one, a strong expert agreement on module relevance was found. In round two, all modules achieved a mean ranking > 3.0, with the lowest being 3.9. Modules with a mean ranking > 3.0 were considered relevant and included in the final analysis. Two modules had an SD > 1.0, indicating a lack of consensus.Conclusions: This study established expert consensus on 32 essential training modules for the Eyesi slit lamp simulator, supporting their integration into an ophthalmology residency curriculum. Further testing under an evidence-based framework is required to integrate them into a structured curriculum and assess their impact on clinical skills.","PeriodicalId":19623,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1999-2020"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12270993/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the Eyesi Slit Lamp Simulator for a Simulated Training Curriculum for Residents in Ophthalmology: A National Delphi study.\",\"authors\":\"Kasper Ruotsalainen Hansen, Simon Joel Lowater, Kristina Sanne Lyngsø, Anne Helene Køllund Nissen, Anna Stage Vergmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40123-025-01175-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Simulation-based training is increasingly used in medical education to improve clinical skills. The Eyesi slit lamp simulator offers a platform for training in slit lamp examination and indirect ophthalmoscopy. However, training needs to be evidence-based to ensure reliable evaluation. Therefore, this study aims to identify relevant training modules on the Eyesi slit lamp simulator for ophthalmology residents through a national Delphi study to develop a training curriculum.Methods: A two-round Delphi study was conducted with chief physicians, consultants, and professors involved in ophthalmology residency training across Denmark. In round one, experts evaluated the relevance of training modules on the Eyesi slit lamp simulator using a binary scale, and modules achieving ≥ 75% in relevance were included in round two. In round two, these modules were rated on a linear scale (1-5) for detailed assessment. Consensus was defined by a standard deviation (SD) < 1.0 and interquartile ranges (IQR) were calculated to assess variability and identify outliers.Results: A total of 11 experts participated in round one (response rate: 84.6%), and 8 experts participated in round two (response rate: 72.7%). In round one, a strong expert agreement on module relevance was found. In round two, all modules achieved a mean ranking > 3.0, with the lowest being 3.9. Modules with a mean ranking > 3.0 were considered relevant and included in the final analysis. Two modules had an SD > 1.0, indicating a lack of consensus.Conclusions: This study established expert consensus on 32 essential training modules for the Eyesi slit lamp simulator, supporting their integration into an ophthalmology residency curriculum. Further testing under an evidence-based framework is required to integrate them into a structured curriculum and assess their impact on clinical skills.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19623,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmology and Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1999-2020\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12270993/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmology and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-025-01175-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40123-025-01175-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

基于模拟的训练越来越多地应用于医学教育中，以提高临床技能。Eyesi裂隙灯模拟器为裂隙灯检查和间接眼科检查提供了一个培训平台。然而，培训需要以证据为基础，以确保可靠的评估。因此，本研究旨在通过全国德尔菲研究，确定eyeesi裂隙灯模拟器对眼科住院医师的相关培训模块，制定培训课程。方法：对丹麦眼科住院医师培训的主任医师、顾问和教授进行两轮德尔菲研究。在第一轮中，专家使用二元量表评估Eyesi裂隙灯模拟器上培训模块的相关性，相关性≥75%的模块被纳入第二轮。在第二轮中，这些模块按照线性量表（1-5）进行评分，以进行详细评估。结果：第一轮共有11位专家参与，回复率为84.6%，第二轮共有8位专家参与，回复率为72.7%。在第一轮中，专家对模块相关性达成了强烈的共识。在第二轮中，所有模块的平均排名为bbb3.0，最低排名为3.9。平均排名为> 3.0的模块被认为是相关的，并被纳入最终分析。两个模块的SD为bbb1.0，表明缺乏共识。结论：本研究为Eyesi裂隙灯模拟器的32个基本培训模块建立了专家共识，支持将其整合到眼科住院医师课程中。需要在以证据为基础的框架下进行进一步测试，以便将它们纳入结构化课程，并评估它们对临床技能的影响。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Validation of the Eyesi Slit Lamp Simulator for a Simulated Training Curriculum for Residents in Ophthalmology: A National Delphi study.

Introduction: Simulation-based training is increasingly used in medical education to improve clinical skills. The Eyesi slit lamp simulator offers a platform for training in slit lamp examination and indirect ophthalmoscopy. However, training needs to be evidence-based to ensure reliable evaluation. Therefore, this study aims to identify relevant training modules on the Eyesi slit lamp simulator for ophthalmology residents through a national Delphi study to develop a training curriculum.

Methods: A two-round Delphi study was conducted with chief physicians, consultants, and professors involved in ophthalmology residency training across Denmark. In round one, experts evaluated the relevance of training modules on the Eyesi slit lamp simulator using a binary scale, and modules achieving ≥ 75% in relevance were included in round two. In round two, these modules were rated on a linear scale (1-5) for detailed assessment. Consensus was defined by a standard deviation (SD) < 1.0 and interquartile ranges (IQR) were calculated to assess variability and identify outliers.

Results: A total of 11 experts participated in round one (response rate: 84.6%), and 8 experts participated in round two (response rate: 72.7%). In round one, a strong expert agreement on module relevance was found. In round two, all modules achieved a mean ranking > 3.0, with the lowest being 3.9. Modules with a mean ranking > 3.0 were considered relevant and included in the final analysis. Two modules had an SD > 1.0, indicating a lack of consensus.

Conclusions: This study established expert consensus on 32 essential training modules for the Eyesi slit lamp simulator, supporting their integration into an ophthalmology residency curriculum. Further testing under an evidence-based framework is required to integrate them into a structured curriculum and assess their impact on clinical skills.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Ophthalmology and Therapy OPHTHALMOLOGY-

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

3.00%

发文量

157

审稿时长

6 weeks

期刊介绍： Aims and Scope Ophthalmology and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed (single-blind), and rapid publication journal. The scope of the journal is broad and will consider all scientifically sound research from preclinical, clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the use of ophthalmological therapies, devices, and surgical techniques. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports/series, trial protocols and short communications such as commentaries and editorials. Ophthalmology and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of quality research, which may be considered of insufficient interest by other journals. Rapid Publication The journal’s publication timelines aim for a rapid peer review of 2 weeks. If an article is accepted it will be published 3–4 weeks from acceptance. The rapid timelines are achieved through the combination of a dedicated in-house editorial team, who manage article workflow, and an extensive Editorial and Advisory Board who assist with peer review. This allows the journal to support the rapid dissemination of research, whilst still providing robust peer review. Combined with the journal’s open access model this allows for the rapid, efficient communication of the latest research and reviews, fostering the advancement of ophthalmic therapies. Open Access All articles published by Ophthalmology and Therapy are open access. Personal Service The journal’s dedicated in-house editorial team offer a personal “concierge service” meaning authors will always have an editorial contact able to update them on the status of their manuscript. The editorial team check all manuscripts to ensure that articles conform to the most recent COPE, GPP and ICMJE publishing guidelines. This supports the publication of ethically sound and transparent research. Digital Features and Plain Language Summaries Ophthalmology and Therapy offers a range of additional features designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. Each article is accompanied by key summary points, giving a time-efficient overview of the content to a wide readership. Articles may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand the scientific content and overall implications of the article. The journal also provides the option to include various types of digital features including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations. All additional features are peer reviewed to the same high standard as the article itself. If you consider that your paper would benefit from the inclusion of a digital feature, please let us know. Our editorial team are able to create high-quality slide decks and infographics in-house, and video abstracts through our partner Research Square, and would be happy to assist in any way we can. For further information about digital features, please contact the journal editor (see ‘Contact the Journal’ for email address), and see the ‘Guidelines for digital features and plain language summaries’ document under ‘Submission guidelines’. For examples of digital features please visit our showcase page https://springerhealthcare.com/expertise/publishing-digital-features/ Publication Fees Upon acceptance of an article, authors will be required to pay the mandatory Rapid Service Fee of €5250/$6000/£4300. The journal will consider fee discounts and waivers for developing countries and this is decided on a case by case basis. Peer Review Process Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the editorial team to ensure they fit within the aims and scope of the journal and are also checked for plagiarism. All suitable submissions are then subject to a comprehensive single-blind peer review. Reviewers are selected based on their relevant expertise and publication history in the subject area. The journal has an extensive pool of editorial and advisory board members who have been selected to assist with peer review based on the afore-mentioned criteria. At least two extensive reviews are required to make the editorial decision, with the exception of some article types such as Commentaries, Editorials, and Letters which are generally reviewed by one member of the Editorial Board. Where reviewer recommendations are conflicted, the editorial board will be contacted for further advice and a presiding decision. Manuscripts are then either accepted, rejected or authors are required to make major or minor revisions (both reviewer comments and editorial comments may need to be addressed). Once a revised manuscript is re-submitted, it is assessed along with the responses to reviewer comments and if it has been adequately revised it will be accepted for publication. Accepted manuscripts are then copyedited and typeset by the production team before online publication. Appeals against decisions following peer review are considered on a case-by-case basis and should be sent to the journal editor. Preprints We encourage posting of preprints of primary research manuscripts on preprint servers, authors’ or institutional websites, and open communications between researchers whether on community preprint servers or preprint commenting platforms. Posting of preprints is not considered prior publication and will not jeopardize consideration in our journals. Authors should disclose details of preprint posting during the submission process or at any other point during consideration in one of our journals. Once the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to ensure that the preprint record is updated with a publication reference, including the DOI and a URL link to the published version of the article on the journal website. Please follow the link for further information on preprint sharing: https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/journal-author/journal-author-helpdesk/submission/1302#c16721550 Copyright Ophthalmology and Therapy''s content is published open access under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, which allows users to read, copy, distribute, and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited. The author assigns the exclusive right to any commercial use of the article to Springer. For more information about the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License, click here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0. Contact For more information about the journal, including pre-submission enquiries, please contact christopher.vautrinot@springer.com.