ReviewActa neurochirurgica2024
Extended reality in cranial and spinal neurosurgery - a bibliometric analysis.
Review in Acta neurochirurgica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The use of the extended reality technologies in simulation-based health professions education: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Cadaver-based hands-on course in cervical spine surgery: a prospective evaluation of surgical confidence and self-perceived autonomy.Acta neurochirurgica · 2026Article
- Patient-centered care in cervical spine surgery - the impact of perceived patient involvement on patient-reported outcomes measures: a Swedish multicenter study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Observational
- Review
- Narrative review of patient-specific 3D visualization and reality technologies in skull base neurosurgery: enhancements in surgical training, planning, and navigation.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis bibliometric analysis of the top 100 cited articles on extended reality (XR) in neurosurgery aimed to reveal trends in this research field. Gender differences in authorship and global distribution of the most-cited articles were also addressed.
methodsA Web of Science electronic database search was conducted. The top 100 most-cited articles related to the scope of this review were retrieved and analyzed for trends in publications, journal characteristics, authorship, global distribution, study design, and focus areas. After a brief description of the top 100 publications, a comparative analysis between spinal and cranial publications was performed.
resultsFrom 2005, there was a significant increase in spinal neurosurgery publications with a focus on pedicle screw placement. Most articles were original research studies, with an emphasis on augmented reality (AR). In cranial neurosurgery, there was no notable increase in publications. There was an increase in studies assessing both AR and virtual reality (VR) research, with a notable emphasis on VR compared to AR. Education, surgical skills assessment, and surgical planning were more common themes in cranial studies compared to spinal studies. Female authorship was notably low in both groups, with no significant increase over time. The USA and Canada contributed most of the publications in the research field.
conclusionsResearch regarding the use of XR in neurosurgery increased significantly from 2005. Cranial research focused on VR and resident education while spinal research focused on AR and neuronavigation. Female authorship was underrepresented. North America provides most of the high-impact research in this area.
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.