ReviewMedical & biological engineering & computing2017
A survey of context recognition in surgery.
Review in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence-Powered Quality Assurance: Transforming Diagnostics, Surgery, and Patient Care-Innovations, Limitations, and Future Directions.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Automatic surgical phase recognition-based skill assessment in laparoscopic distal gastrectomy using multicenter videos.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Surgery and Its Potential for Gastric Cancer.Journal of gastric cancer · 2023Review
- State-of-the-art of situation recognition systems for intraoperative procedures.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2022Review
- Explaining a model predicting quality of surgical practice: a first presentation to and review by clinical experts.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2021Article
- Electrophysiological effects of mindfulness meditation in a concentration test.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2021Review
- [Digitalization in surgery : What surgeons currently think and know about it-results of an online survey].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the introduction of operating rooms of the future context awareness has gained importance in the surgical environment. This paper organizes and reviews different approaches for recognition of context in surgery. Major electronic research databases were queried to obtain relevant publications submitted between the years 2010 and 2015. Three different types of context were identified: (i) the surgical workflow context, (ii) surgeon's cognitive and (iii) technical state context. A total of 52 relevant studies were identified and grouped based on the type of context detected and sensors used. Different approaches were summarized to provide recommendations for future research. There is still room for improvement in terms of methods used and evaluations performed. Machine learning should be used more extensively to uncover hidden relationships between different properties of the surgeon's state, particularly when performing cognitive context recognition. Furthermore, validation protocols should be improved by performing more evaluations in situ and with a higher number of unique participants. The paper also provides a structured outline of recent context recognition methods to facilitate development of new generation context-aware surgical support systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28691131What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.