ArticleCureus2022
A Cross-Sectional Study of Resident Training in Robotic Surgery in India.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspectives of robotic surgeons on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of robotic surgery in india: a cross-sectional survey.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Review
- In the Hands of a Robot, From the Operating Room to the Courtroom: The Medicolegal Considerations of Robotic Surgery.Cureus · 2023Review
- Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Breast Surgery: Recent Evidence with Comparative Clinical Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The widespread implementation of robotic surgery in the Indian subcontinent has received mixed reactions from residents and mentors alike. To date, however, no study has documented the perception of Indian surgical trainees on the effect of robotic surgery on surgical training. Therefore, we conducted a questionnaire-based study on Indian surgical residents to assess their views about robotic surgery and the effect, they believe, it might have on resident training. Materials and methods Questionnaires were distributed to 300 surgical residents from programs that do not have surgical robots. All other residents, faculty, medical students, and interns were excluded from the study. The responses were collected and analyzed using appropriate statistical methods. Results Overall, 210 surgical residents responded to the survey. A majority of them (57.72%) reported low levels of knowledge regarding robotic surgery. While 88.10% of the study participants reported that the use of robotic surgery will continue to rise in India, an equal proportion (88%) believed that procuring a robot in their program will impair their training in open and laparoscopic surgeries. Conclusions The introduction of robotic surgery into surgical residency programs is seen, by most residents, as a threat to training in traditional surgical methods. This calls for the effective incorporation of robotic training into residency training with equal distribution of resident training cases in programs across the country.
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.