Table 1 Regression weight estimates for path analysis of the FLS score (grayed rows: significant after controlling for a false discovery rate of 0.05 with Benjamini–Hochberg adjustment).

Dependent var.		Independent variable	Weight Estimate	S.E.	C.R.	P
RPFC to LPMC	<---	Expert vs. Novice	0.02	0.12	0.13	0.89
RPFC to SMA	<---	Expert vs. Novice	−0.23	0.08	−2.94	0.00
LPMC to RPFC	<---	Expert vs. Novice	0.15	0.11	1.47	0.14
LPMC to SMA	<---	Expert vs. Novice	−0.21	0.09	−2.45	0.01
SMA to LPFC	<---	Expert vs. Novice	0.22	0.09	2.32	0.02
RPFC to LPMC	<---	Physical vs. VR Simulator	0.23	0.12	1.93	0.05
RPFC to SMA	<---	Physical vs. VR Simulator	−0.13	0.08	−1.63	0.10
LPMC to RPFC	<---	Physical vs. VR Simulator	−0.09	0.11	−0.84	0.40
LPMC to SMA	<---	Physical vs. VR Simulator	0.06	0.09	0.64	0.52
SMA to LPFC	<---	Physical vs. VR Simulator	−0.12	0.09	−1.26	0.21
FLS score	<---	RPFC to LPMC	−7.11	5.83	−1.22	0.22
FLS score	<---	RPFC to SMA	21.01	8.43	2.49	0.01
FLS score	<---	LPMC to RPFC	3.66	6.50	0.56	0.57
FLS score	<---	LPMC to SMA	3.13	7.89	0.40	0.69
FLS score	<---	SMA to LPFC	−1.16	7.15	−0.16	0.87

Standard errors (S.E.) and critical ratios (C.R.) are also presented in addition to the p value (P) with two significant figures.

Quick links

Search