Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37637444›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches2020

How Wearable Technology Can Facilitate AI Analysis of Surgical Videos.

Carla M Pugh, Ahmed Ghazi, Dimitrios Stefanidis, Steven D Schwaitzberg, Martin A Martino, Jeffrey S Levy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Performance assessment using sensor technology.Journal of surgical oncology · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

6 authors.

Carla M PughFrom the Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.
Ahmed GhaziDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY.
Dimitrios StefanidisDepartment of Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN.
Steven D SchwaitzbergDepartment of Surgery, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY.
Martin A MartinoLehigh Valley Institute for Surgical Excellence, Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA.
Jeffrey S LevyInstitute for Surgical Excellence, Washington, DC.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Operative video has great potential to enable instant replays of critical surgical decisions for training and quality review. Recently, artificial intelligence (AI) has shown early promise as a method of enabling efficient video review, analysis, and segmentation. Despite the progress with AI analysis of surgical videos, more work needs to be done to improve the accuracy and efficiency of AI-driven video analysis. At a recent consensus conference held on July 10-11, 2020, 8 research teams shared their work using AI for surgical video analysis. Four of the teams showcased the utility of wearable technology in providing objective surgical metrics. Data from these technologies were shown to pinpoint important cognitive and motor actions during operative tasks and procedures. The results support the utility of wearable technology to facilitate efficient and accurate video analysis and segmentation.

Indexed as

Artificial intelligenceObjective metricsPerformance assessmentWearable technology

Identifiers

PMID37637444
PMCPMC10455149

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.