ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Development and validation of metrics for a new RAPN training model.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. 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.
- Ten-year update on the European Association of Urology Robotic Section (ERUS) fellowship training for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-based expert trajectory guidance in anFrontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Proctoring in robot-assisted urologic surgery: insights from a multicenter survey.Journal of robotic surgery · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is a complex and index procedure that urologists need to learn how to perform safely. No validated performance metrics specifically developed for a RAPN training model (TM) exist. A Core Metrics Group specifically adapted human RAPN metrics to be used in a newly developed RAPN TM, explicitly defining phases, steps, errors, and critical errors. A modified Delphi meeting concurred on the face and content validation of the new metrics. One hundred percent consensus was achieved by the Delphi panel on 8 Phases, 32 Steps, 136 Errors and 64 Critical Errors. Two trained assessors evaluated recorded video performances of novice and expert RAPN surgeons executing an emulated RAPN in the newly developed TM. There were no differences in procedure Steps completed by the two groups. Experienced RAPN surgeons made 34% fewer Total Errors than the Novice group. Performance score for both groups was divided at the median score using Total Error scores, into HiError and LoError subgroups. The LowErrs Expert RAPN surgeons group made 118% fewer Total Errors than the Novice HiErrs group. Furthermore, the LowErrs Expert RAPN surgeons made 77% fewer Total Errors than the HiErrs Expert RAPN surgeons. These results established construct and discriminative validity of the metrics. The authors described a novel RAPN TM and its associated performance metrics with evidence supporting their face, content, construct, and discriminative validation. This report and evidence support the implementation of a simulation-based proficiency-based progression (PBP) training program for RAPN.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38563887What 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.