ArticleBrain & spine2023
The use of advanced technology for preoperative planning in cranial surgery - A survey by the EANS Young Neurosurgeons Committee.
Article in Brain & spine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Workflow for the Creation of 3D Stereoscopic Models of Supra- and Infratentorial Brain Venous Anatomy and their Integration in a Virtual Reality Environment.Neuroinformatics · 2025Article
- Transforming Global Neurosurgical Education Through Mixed Reality Development: A 12-Year Bibliometric Analysis.Cureus · 2025Review
- Simulation tools in neuro-oncological surgery: a scoping review of perioperative and training applications.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Technological advancements provided several preoperative tools allowing for precise preoperative planning in cranial neurosurgery, aiming to increase the efficacy and safety of surgery. However, little data are available regarding if and how young neurosurgeons are trained in using such technologies, how often they use them in clinical practice, and how valuable they consider these technologies. Research question: How frequently these technologies are used during training and clinical practice as well as to how their perceived value can be qualitatively assessed. Materials and methods: The Young Neurosurgeons' Committee (YNC) of the European Association of Neurosurgical Societies (EANS) distributed a 14-items survey among young neurosurgeons between June 1st and August 31st Results: A total of 441 responses were collected. Most responders (42.34%) received "formal" training during their residency. Planning techniques were used mainly in neuro-oncology (90.86%), and 3D visualization of patients' DICOM dataset using open-source software was the most frequently used (>20 times/month, 20.34% of responders). Software for 3D visualization of patients' DICOM dataset was the most valuable technology, especially for planning surgical approach (42.03%). Conversely, simulation based on augmented/mixed/virtual reality was considered the less valuable tool, being rated below sufficiency by 39.7% of responders. Discussion and conclusion: Training for using preoperative planning technologies in cranial neurosurgery is provided by neurosurgical residency programs. Software for 3D visualization of DICOM datasets is the most valuable and used tool, especially in neuro-oncology. Interestingly, simulation tools based on augmented/virtual/mixed reality are considered less valuable and, therefore, less used than other technologies.
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.