Research review Performance of technology-driven simulators for medical studentsda systematic review Michael Michael, BSc, a,b Hamid Abboudi, MRCS, c Jean Ker, BMSc, MB ChB, MD, FRCGP, FRCPE, FHEA, d Mohammed Shamim Khan, FEBU, FRCSUrol, a,b Prokar Dasgupta, MSc, MD, FRCSUrol, FEBU, a,b and Kamran Ahmed, MRCS, PhD a,b, * a MRC Centre for Transplantation, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, King’s Health Partners, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom b Department of Urology, Guy’s Hospital, London, United Kingdom c Department of Urology, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, United Kingdom d Clinical Skills Centre, Level 6, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Dundee, United Kingdom article info Article history: Received 5 February 2014 Received in revised form 7 May 2014 Accepted 24 June 2014 Available online xxx Keywords: Education Medical student Simulation technology abstract Background: Simulation-based education has evolved as a key training tool in high-risk industries such as aviation and the military. In parallel with these industries, the bene- fits of incorporating specialty-oriented simulation training within medical schools are vast. Adoption of simulators into medical school education programs has shown great promise and has the potential to revolutionize modern undergraduate education. Materials and methods: An English literature search was carried out using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and psychINFO databases to identify all randomized controlled studies pertaining to “technology-driven” simulators used in undergraduate medical education. A validity framework incorporating the “framework for technology enhanced learning” report by the Department of Health, United Kingdom, was used to evaluate the capabilities of each technology-driven simulator. Information was collected regarding the simulator type, characteristics, and brand name. Where possible, we extracted information from the studies on the simulators’ performance with respect to validity status, reliability, feasi- bility, education impact, acceptability, and cost effectiveness. Results: We identified 19 studies, analyzing simulators for medical students across a va- riety of procedure-based specialities including; cardiovascular (n ¼ 2), endoscopy (n ¼ 3), laparoscopic surgery (n ¼ 8), vascular access (n ¼ 2), ophthalmology (n ¼ 1), obstetrics and gynecology (n ¼ 1), anesthesia (n ¼ 1), and pediatrics (n ¼ 1). Incorporation of simulators has so far been on an institutional level; no national or international trends have yet emerged. Conclusions: Simulators are capable of providing a highly educational and realistic experience for the medical students within a variety of speciality-oriented teaching * Corresponding author. King’s College London, Department of Urology, Guy’s Hospital, London, SE1 9RT, United Kingdom. Tel.: þ44 (0) 20 7188 6795; fax: þ44 (0) 20 7188 6785. E-mail address: k.ahmed@imperial.ac.uk (K. Ahmed). Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect journal homepage: www.JournalofSurgicalResearch.com journal of surgical research xxx (2014) 1 e13 0022-4804/$ e see front matter ª 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.06.043