ReviewSurgical endoscopy2022
Breaking down the silos of artificial intelligence in surgery: glossary of terms.
Review in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of annotation for surgical process model analysis in minimally invasive surgery based on video.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Pooled it
- Nomographic predictive models for complications after minimally invasive esophagectomy: Current status and future perspectives.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Updates, Applications and Future Directions of Deep Learning for the Images Processing in the Field of Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence-Based Software as a Medical Device (AI-SaMD): A Systematic Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Current Role of Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Esophageal Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Could Artificial Intelligence guide surgeons' hands?Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes · 2023Article
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 at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe literature on artificial intelligence (AI) in surgery has advanced rapidly during the past few years. However, the published studies on AI are mostly reported by computer scientists using their own jargon which is unfamiliar to surgeons.
methodsA literature search was conducted in using PubMed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. The primary outcome of this review is to provide a glossary with definitions of the commonly used AI terms in surgery to improve their understanding by surgeons.
resultsOne hundred ninety-five studies were included in this review, and 38 AI terms related to surgery were retrieved. Convolutional neural networks were the most frequently culled term by the search, accounting for 74 studies on AI in surgery, followed by classification task (n = 62), artificial neural networks (n = 53), and regression (n = 49). Then, the most frequent expressions were supervised learning (reported in 24 articles), support vector machine (SVM) in 21, and logistic regression in 16. The rest of the 38 terms was seldom mentioned.
conclusionsThe proposed glossary can be used by several stakeholders. First and foremost, by residents and attending consultant surgeons, both having to understand the fundamentals of AI when reading such articles. Secondly, junior researchers at the start of their career in Surgical Data Science and thirdly experts working in the regulatory sections of companies involved in the AI Business Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) preparing documents for submission to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or other agencies for approval.
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.