ArticleInnovative surgical sciences2017
The next step: intelligent digital assistance for clinical operating rooms.
Article in Innovative surgical sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in the management of uveitic cataract: current strategies and emerging perspectives.International ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Sustainability in Cataract and Refractive Surgery: Current Challenges and Future Perspectives.Journal of ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Evolution and Applications of Artificial Intelligence to Cataract Surgery.Ophthalmology science · 2022Article
- Automatic speech recognition in the operating room - An essential contemporary tool or a redundant gadget? A survey evaluation among physicians in form of a qualitative study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2020Article
- Clinical Desire for an Artificial Intelligence-Based Surgical Assistant System: Electronic Survey-Based Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2020Article
- Surgery 4.0: the natural culmination of the industrial revolution?Innovative surgical sciences · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the emergence of new technologies, the surgical working environment becomes increasingly complex and comprises many medical devices that have to be taken cared of. However, the goal is to reduce the workload of the surgical team to allow them to fully focus on the actual surgical procedure. Therefore, new strategies are needed to keep the working environment manageable. Existing research projects in the field of intelligent medical environments mostly concentrate on workflow modeling or single smart features rather than building up a complete intelligent environment. In this article, we present the concept of intelligent digital assistance for clinical operating rooms (IDACO), providing the surgeon assistance in many different situations before and during an ongoing procedure using natural spoken language. The speech interface enables the surgeon to concentrate on the surgery and control the technical environment at the same time, without taking care of how to interact with the system. Furthermore, the system observes the context of the surgery and controls several devices autonomously at the appropriate time during the procedure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.