Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37620748›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2024

Toward an interoperable, intraoperative situation recognition system via process modeling, execution, and control using the standards BPMN and CMMN.

Denise Junger, Elisaveta Just, Johanna M Brandenburg, Martin Wagner, Katharina Schaumann, Thomas Klenzner, Oliver Burgert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

7 authors.

Denise JungerSchool of Informatics, Research Group Computer Assisted Medicine (CaMed), Reutlingen University, Reutlingen, Germany. denise.junger@reutlingen-university.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7895-3210
Elisaveta JustSchool of Informatics, Research Group Computer Assisted Medicine (CaMed), Reutlingen University, Reutlingen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2146-9954
Johanna M BrandenburgDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6486-5810
Martin WagnerDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9831-9110
Katharina SchaumannDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Thomas KlenznerDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Oliver BurgertSchool of Informatics, Research Group Computer Assisted Medicine (CaMed), Reutlingen University, Reutlingen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7118-4730

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeFor the modeling, execution, and control of complex, non-standardized intraoperative processes, a modeling language is needed that reflects the variability of interventions. As the established Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) reaches its limits in terms of flexibility, the Case Management Model and Notation (CMMN) was considered as it addresses weakly structured processes.

methodsTo analyze the suitability of the modeling languages, BPMN and CMMN models of a Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy and Cochlea Implantation were derived and integrated into a situation recognition workflow. Test cases were used to contrast the differences and compare the advantages and disadvantages of the models concerning modeling, execution, and control. Furthermore, the impact on transferability was investigated.

resultsCompared to BPMN, CMMN allows flexibility for modeling intraoperative processes while remaining understandable. Although more effort and process knowledge are needed for execution and control within a situation recognition system, CMMN enables better transferability of the models and therefore the system. Concluding, CMMN should be chosen as a supplement to BPMN for flexible process parts that can only be covered insufficiently by BPMN, or otherwise as a replacement for the entire process.

conclusionCMMN offers the flexibility for variable, weakly structured process parts, and is thus suitable for surgical interventions. A combination of both notations could allow optimal use of their advantages and support the transferability of the situation recognition system.

Indexed as

Case ManagementHumansWorkflowBPMNCMMNIntraoperative areaSituation recognitionSurgical process modeling

Identifiers

PMID37620748
PMCPMC10770268

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.