Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33000365›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2020

Bidirectional long short-term memory for surgical skill classification of temporally segmented tasks.

Jason D Kelly, Ashley Petersen, Thomas S Lendvay, Timothy M Kowalewski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Objective skill assessment for cataract surgery from surgical microscope video.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025
    Article
  4. Machine learning in healthcare citizen science: A scoping review.International journal of medical informatics · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Jason D KellyDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA. kell1917@umn.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7800-4314
Ashley PetersenDivision of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Thomas S LendvayDepartment of Urology, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA, USA.
Timothy M KowalewskiDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Funding

University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR002494 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R, WEISDORF, DANIEL J · 2018 to 2022
$34.9M
National Science Foundation 1847610NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002494NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR002494U.S. Department of Defense W81XWH-15-2-0030
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe majority of historical surgical skill research typically analyzes holistic summary task-level metrics to create a skill classification for a performance. Recent advances in machine learning allow time series classification at the sub-task level, allowing predictions on segments of tasks, which could improve task-level technical skill assessment.

methodsA bidirectional long short-term memory (LSTM) network was used with 8-s windows of multidimensional time-series data from the Basic Laparoscopic Urologic Skills dataset. The network was trained on experts and novices from four common surgical tasks. Stratified cross-validation with regularization was used to avoid overfitting. The misclassified cases were re-submitted for surgical technical skill assessment to crowds using Amazon Mechanical Turk to re-evaluate and to analyze the level of agreement with previous scores.

resultsPerformance was best for the suturing task, with 96.88% accuracy at predicting whether a performance was an expert or novice, with 1 misclassification, when compared to previously obtained crowd evaluations. When compared with expert surgeon ratings, the LSTM predictions resulted in a Spearman coefficient of 0.89 for suturing tasks. When crowds re-evaluated misclassified performances, it was found that for all 5 misclassified cases from peg transfer and suturing tasks, the crowds agreed more with our LSTM model than with the previously obtained crowd scores.

conclusionThe technique presented shows results not incomparable with labels which would be obtained from crowd-sourced labels of surgical tasks. However, these results bring about questions of the reliability of crowd sourced labels in videos of surgical tasks. We, as a research community, should take a closer look at crowd labeling with higher scrutiny, systematically look at biases, and quantify label noise.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceHumansLaparoscopyNeural Networks, ComputerReproducibility of ResultsUrologic Surgical ProceduresBidirectional LSTMCrowd sourcingMachine learningSurgical skillSurgical technical skill

Identifiers

PMID33000365
PMCPMC7677176

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.