ArticleSurgical endoscopy2021
A novel gaze-controlled flexible robotized endoscope; preliminary trial and report.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2021. 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Multimodal human-computer interaction in interventional radiology and surgery: a systematic literature review.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of User Interfaces for Actuated Control of Endoscopes During Flexible Endoscopy.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2026Article
- Eye-controlled endoscopy - a benchtop trial of a novel robotic steering platform - iGAZE2.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- A generic scope actuation system for flexible endoscopes.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- User interfaces for actuated scope maneuvering in surgical systems: a scoping review.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Eye Tracking and Motion Data Predict Endoscopic Sinus Surgery Skill.The Laryngoscope · 2023Article
- Scope actuation system for articulated laparoscopes.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Eye tracking technology in endoscopy: Looking to the future.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2023Review
- Perioperative Nursing of Vitrectomy for Ocular Trauma under the Guidance of Ophthalmoscope.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInterventional endoluminal therapy is rapidly advancing as a minimally invasive surgical technique. The expanding remit of endoscopic therapy necessitates precision control. Eye tracking is an emerging technology which allows intuitive control of devices. This was a feasibility study to establish if a novel eye gaze-controlled endoscopic system could be used to intuitively control an endoscope.
methodsAn eye gaze-control system consisting of eye tracking glasses, specialist cameras and a joystick was used to control a robotically driven endoscope allowing steering, advancement, withdrawal and retroflexion. Eight experienced and eight non-endoscopists used both the eye gaze system and a conventional endoscope to identify ten targets in two simulated environments: a sphere and an upper gastrointestinal (UGI) model. Completion of tasks was timed. Subjective feedback was collected from each participant on task load (NASA Task Load Index) and acceptance of technology (Van der Laan scale).
resultsWhen using gaze-control endoscopy, non-endoscopists were significantly quicker when using gaze-control rather than conventional endoscopy (sphere task 3:54 ± 1:17 vs. 9:05 ± 5:40 min, p = 0.012, and UGI model task 1:59 ± 0:24 vs 3:45 ± 0:53 min, p < .001). Non-endoscopists reported significantly higher NASA-TLX workload total scores using conventional endoscopy versus gaze-control (80.6 ± 11.3 vs 22.5 ± 13.8, p < .001). Endoscopists reported significantly higher total NASA-TLX workload scores using gaze control versus conventional endoscopy (54.2 ± 16 vs 26.9 ± 15.3, p = 0.012). All subjects reported that the gaze-control had positive 'usefulness' and 'satisfaction' score of 0.56 ± 0.83 and 1.43 ± 0.51 respectively.
conclusionsThe novel eye gaze-control system was significantly quicker to use and subjectively lower in workload when used by non-endoscopists. Further work is needed to see if this would translate into a shallower learning curve to proficiency versus conventional endoscopy. The eye gaze-control system appears feasible as an intuitive endoscope control system. Hybrid gaze and hand control may prove a beneficial technology to evolving endoscopic platforms.
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.