Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35433825›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in surgery2022

Application of Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, and Mixed Reality in Endourology and Urolithiasis: An Update by YAU Endourology and Urolithiasis Working Group.

B M Zeeshan Hameed, Shraddha Somani, Etienne Xavier Keller, R Balamanigandan, Satyasundara Mahapatra, Amelia Pietropaolo, Şenol Tonyali, Patrick Juliebø-Jones, Nithesh Naik, Dilip Mishra and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Innovations in Kidney Stone Removal.Research and reports in urology · 2023
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. HoloLensTherapeutic advances in urology
    Review
  18. 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

13 authors at 10 institutions in 7 countries.

B M Zeeshan HameedDepartment of Urology, Father Muller Medical College, Mangalore, India.
Shraddha SomaniDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Etienne Xavier KellerDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
R BalamanigandanDepartment of Artificial Intelligence, Institute of Computer Science and Engineering, Saveetha School of Engineering, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, India.
Satyasundara MahapatraComputer Science and Engineering, Pranveer Singh Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India.
Amelia PietropaoloEuropean Association of Urology-Young Academic Urologists Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group, Arnhem, Netherlands.
Şenol TonyaliDepartment of Urology, Istanbul University Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
Patrick Juliebø-JonesDepartment of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Nithesh NaikInternational Training and Research in Uro-oncology and Endourology Group, Manipal, India.
Dilip MishraDepartment of Urology, Global Rainbow Healthcare, Agra, India.
Sarvesh KumarDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Babu Banarasi Das University, Lucknow, India.
Piotr ChlostaDepartment of Urology, Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Kraków, Poland.
Bhaskar K SomaniEuropean Association of Urology-Young Academic Urologists Urolithiasis and Endourology Working Group, Arnhem, Netherlands.
European Association of Urology · NLManipal Academy of Higher Education · INBabu Banarasi Das University · INFather Muller Medical College Hospital · INHaukeland University Hospital · NOIndian Institute of Technology Kanpur · INIstanbul University · TRJagiellonian University · PLSaveetha University · INUniversity of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The integration of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and mixed reality (MR) in urological practices and medical education has led to modern training systems that are cost-effective and with an increased expectation toward surgical performance and outcomes. VR aids the user in interacting with the virtual environment realistically by providing a three-dimensional (3D) view of the structures inside the body with high-level precision. AR enhances the real environment around users by integrating experience with virtual information over physical models and objects, which in turn has improved understanding of physiological mechanisms and anatomical structures. MR is an immersive technology that provides virtual content to interact with real elements. The field of urolithiasis has adapted the technological advancements, newer instruments, and methods to perform endourologic treatment procedures. This mini-review discusses the applications of Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, and Mixed Reality in endourology and urolithiasis.

Indexed as

augmented realityendourologymixed realityurolithiasis (urinary stones)virtual reality

Identifiers

PMID35433825
PMCPMC9010500
OpenAlexW4220845326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.