Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31049197›Full record

ReviewAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2019

Artificial intelligence, regenerative surgery, robotics? What is realistic for the future of surgery?

Sam P Tarassoli

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sam P TarassoliASiT Medical Student Essay Prize 2019, Swansea University College of Medicine (Year 4), Grove Building, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK.
Swansea University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The potential of surgery lies in the technological advances that would complement it. The landscape of the field will differ depending on the time period being looked at and would no doubt include conjecture. Initial breakthroughs will need to pave the way for future medical technology and apply to the surgical sciences. Within the next 10 years we would expect to see the emergence of big data analysis, cuttingedge image processing techniques for surgical planning and better implementation of virtual and augmented reality in operating theatres for both patient care and teaching purposes. Over the next 50 to 100 years, the use of quantum computing should lead to increased automation in our healthcare systems. The inception of novel biomaterial invention and advanced genetic engineering will usher in the new age of regenerative medicine in the clinical setting. The future of surgery includes many predictions and promises, but it is apparent that the development will lead to bettering outcome and focus on patient care.

Indexed as

InnovationMedical TechnologySurgery

Identifiers

PMID31049197
PMCPMC6479269
OpenAlexW2937699622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.