Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28455800›Full record

ReviewJournal of robotic surgery2018

Global trends in paediatric robot-assisted urological surgery: a bibliometric and Progressive Scholarly Acceptance analysis.

Thomas P Cundy, Simon J D Harley, Hani J Marcus, Archie Hughes-Hallett, Sanjeev Khurana

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of robotic surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Artificial intelligence in dermatology and healthcare: An overview.Indian journal of dermatology, venereology and leprology
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Thomas P CundyDiscipline of Surgery, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia. thomas.cundy@adelaide.edu.au.
Simon J D HarleyDiscipline of Surgery, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Hani J MarcusThe Hamlyn Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Archie Hughes-HallettThe Hamlyn Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Sanjeev KhuranaDepartment of Paediatric Surgery, Women's and Children's Hospital, 72 King William Road, Adelaide, SA, 5006, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The inaugural robot-assisted urological procedure in a child was performed in 2002. This study aims to catalogue the impact of this technology by utilizing bibliographic data as a surrogate measure for global diffusion activity and to appraise the quality of evidence in this field. A systematic literature search was performed to retrieve all reported cases of paediatric robot-assisted urological surgery published between 2003 and 2016. The status of scientific community acceptance was determined using a newly developed analysis model named progressive scholarly acceptance. A total of 151 publications were identified that reported 3688 procedures in 3372 patients. The most reported procedures were pyeloplasty (n = 1923) and ureteral reimplantation (n = 1120). There were 16 countries and 48 institutions represented in the literature. On average, the total case volume reported in the literature more than doubled each year (mean value increase 236.6% per annum). The level of evidence for original studies remains limited to case reports, case series and retrospective comparative studies. Progressive Scholarly Acceptance charts indicate that robot-assisted techniques for pyeloplasty or ureteral reimplantation are yet to be accepted by the scientific community. Global adoption trends for robotic surgery in paediatric urology have been progressive but remain low volume. Pyeloplasty and ureteral reimplantation are dominant applications. Robot-assisted techniques for these procedures are not supported by high quality evidence at present. Next-generation robots are forecast to be smaller, cheaper, more advanced and customized for paediatric patients. Ongoing critical evaluation must occur simultaneously with expected technology evolution.

Indexed as

BibliometricsChildDiffusion of InnovationGlobal HealthHumansRobotic Surgical ProceduresUrologic Surgical ProceduresUrologistsChildrenPaediatricProgressive scholarly acceptanceRobot-assisted surgeryUrology

Identifiers

PMID28455800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.