ArticleJAMA surgery2020
Association of Surgical Skill Assessment With Clinical Outcomes in Cancer Surgery.
Article in JAMA surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05279287 (Video Analysis of Errors and Technical Performance Within Minimally Invasive Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 85 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Video Analysis of Errors and Technical Performance Within Minimally Invasive Surgery
Who cites it
85 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 154 citations in OpenAlex.
- Expert consensus on best content of a robotic surgical curriculum: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Objective assessment tools in laparoscopic or robotic-assisted gynecological surgery: A systematic review.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2024Pooled it
- The utility of synoptic operation reports in colorectal surgery: a systematic review.International journal of colorectal disease · 2024Pooled it
- Training and assessment for colorectal surgery and appendicectomy- a systematic review.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024Pooled it
- European Society of Coloproctology guideline on training in robotic colorectal surgery (2024).Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2024Guideline
- Evaluation of objective tools and artificial intelligence in robotic surgery technical skills assessment: a systematic review.The British journal of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Technical skill assessment in minimally invasive surgery using artificial intelligence: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Video-based tools for surgical quality assessment of technical skills in laparoscopic procedures: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Assessment methods in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a systematic review of available instruments.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Pooled it
- What are clinically relevant performance metrics in robotic surgery? A systematic review of the literature.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The association between video-based assessment of intraoperative technical performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Pooled it
- P338: summarizing measures of proficiency in transanal total mesorectal excision-a systematic review.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Pooled it
- Association between Surgical Technical Skills and Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsPooled it
- Randomised trial on the economic impact of proficiency-based progression vs conventional robotic surgical training.BJU international · 2026Trial
- Surgical skill simulation training to proficiency reduces procedural errors among novice cardiac device implanters: a randomized study.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Trial
- Validation of a novel, low-fidelity virtual reality simulator and an artificial intelligence assessment approach for peg transfer laparoscopic training.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Effect of Metrics-Based Simulation Training to Proficiency on Procedure Quality and Errors Among Novice Cardiac Device Implanters: The IMPROF Randomized Trial.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Decoding surgical competence: surgical gesture analysis can determine competence in simulated VATS lobectomy, a validation study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Use of Operative Video Technology in Surgical Education: A Systematic Review.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2026Review
25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Complex surgical interventions are inherently prone to variation yet they are not objectively measured. The reasons for outcome differences following cancer surgery are unclear. Objective: To quantify surgical skill within advanced laparoscopic procedures and its association with histopathological and clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This analysis of data and video from the Australasian Laparoscopic Cancer of Rectum (ALaCaRT) and 2-dimensional/3-dimensional (2D3D) multicenter randomized laparoscopic total mesorectal excision trials, which were conducted at 28 centers in Australia, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand, was performed from 2018 to 2019 and included 176 patients with clinical T1 to T3 rectal adenocarcinoma 15 cm or less from the anal verge. Case videos underwent blinded objective analysis using a bespoke performance assessment tool developed with a 62-international expert Delphi exercise and workshop, interview, and pilot phases. Interventions: Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision undertaken with curative intent by 34 credentialed surgeons. Main Outcomes and Measures: Histopathological (plane of mesorectal dissection, ALaCaRT composite end point success [mesorectal fascial plane, circumferential margin, ≥1 mm; distal margin, ≥1 mm]) and 30-day morbidity. End points were analyzed using surgeon quartiles defined by tool scores. Results: The laparoscopic total mesorectal excision performance tool was produced and shown to be reliable and valid for the specialist level (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.889; 95% CI, 0.832-0.926; P < .001). A substantial variation in tool scores was recorded (range, 25-48). Scores were associated with the number of intraoperative errors, plane of mesorectal dissection, and short-term patient morbidity, including the number and severity of complications. Upper quartile-scoring surgeons obtained excellent results compared with the lower quartile (mesorectal fascial plane: 93% vs 59%; number needed to treat [NNT], 2.9, P = .002; ALaCaRT end point success, 83% vs 58%; NNT, 4; P = .03; 30-day morbidity, 23% vs 50%; NNT, 3.7; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: Intraoperative surgical skill can be objectively and reliably measured in complex cancer interventions. Substantial variation in technical performance among credentialed surgeons is seen and significantly associated with clinical and pathological outcomes.
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.