ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2021
Proctorship in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery.
Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled 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
- Scaling robotic surgery: the role, responsibilities and challenges of robotic proctorship in colorectal surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Learning Curve for Robotic Colorectal Surgery.Cancers · 2024Review
- Training for Rectal Resection in the Era of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy and Organ Preservation: Safeguarding Competence as Operative Casemix Evolves.ANZ journal of surgeryArticle
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
Teaching an established surgeon in a novel technique by a colleague who has acquired a level of expertise is often referred to as "proctoring" or "precepting." Surgical preceptorships can be defined as supervised teaching programs, whereby individual or groups of surgeons (proctors) experienced in a certain technique support a colleague who wants to adopt this technique (sometimes referred to as "delegates" or "preceptees"). Preceptorship programs really focus on a specific technique, technology, or skill which is required to broaden, complement, or transform an established surgeon's practice. Within colorectal surgery, in the past 30 years, there is been an evolution of interventional options including open, laparoscopic, robotic, and endoscopic procedures. With each new emerging technology and technique, safe and effective uptake by established surgeons is best been attained by a period of proctorship by an experienced colleague. Formalizing this has been facilitated largely through industry support. There, however, remains a considerable chasm when it comes to standardization, quality control, and jurisprudence. This article aims to describe the requirements for a contemporary proctorship program, to examine instruments of quality control, and how to improve effectiveness.
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.