ArticleLanguage resources and evaluation2024
The robotic-surgery propositional bank.
Article in Language resources and evaluation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interdisciplinary Dialogues on Surgical Data Science: Revising Its Benefits for Surgical Stakeholders and Patients.IEEE transactions on medical robotics and bionics · 2026Article
- ReflectOR: an LLM-based Agent for Post-Operative Surgical Debriefing.... International Workshop on Spoken Dialogue Systems Technology. International Workshop on Spoken Dialogue Systems Technology · 2026Article
- A Standardized Temporal Segmentation Framework and Annotation Resource Library in Robotic Surgery.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2025Article
- Surgery without distance: will 5G-based robot-assisted telesurgery redefine modern surgery?Translational lung cancer research · 2025Review
- Surgical video workflow analysis via visual-language learning.npj health systems · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery is the gold standard for the surgical treatment of many pathological conditions since it guarantees to the patient shorter hospital stay and quicker recovery. Several manuals and academic papers describe how to perform these interventions and thus contain important domain-specific knowledge. This information, if automatically extracted and processed, can be used to extract or summarize surgical practices or develop decision making systems that can help the surgeon or nurses to optimize the patient's management before, during, and after the surgery by providing theoretical-based suggestions. However, general English natural language understanding algorithms have lower efficacy and coverage issues when applied to domain others than those they are typically trained on, and a domain specific textual annotated corpus is missing. To overcome this problem, we annotated the first robotic-surgery procedural corpus, with PropBank-style semantic labels. Starting from the original PropBank framebank, we enriched it by adding new lemmas, frames and semantic arguments required to cover missing information in general English but needed in procedural surgical language, releasing the Robotic-Surgery Procedural Framebank (RSPF). We then collected from robotic-surgery textbooks as-is sentences for a total of 32,448 tokens, and we annotated them with RSPF labels. We so obtained and publicly released the first annotated corpus of the robotic-surgical domain that can be used to foster further research on language understanding and procedural entities and relations extraction from clinical and surgical scientific literature.
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.