Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39606290›Full record

ReviewAsian journal of neurosurgery2024

Evolution of Robotics in Neurosurgery.

Salman T Shaikh, T A Dwarakanath, Aliasgar V Moiyadi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Asian journal of neurosurgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Design and Performance of a Neurosurgery Assisting Device.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    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

3 authors.

Salman T ShaikhDepartment of Neurosurgery, Salford Royal Hospital, Manchester Centre for Clinical Neurosciences, United Kingdom.
T A DwarakanathSection for Intelligent Machines and Robotics, Division of Remote Handling & Robotics, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Aliasgar V MoiyadiNeurosurgical Oncology Services, Department of Surgical oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Technology and neurosurgery have gone hand in hand since a long time. Technological development of robotics in neurosurgery over the last couple of decades has been rapid, yet it still has a long way to go before it becomes a "routine" element of the standard neurosurgical procedure. Apart from the obvious advantages they have over humans, that is, precision, consistency, endurance, and reproducibility, robots also provide additional freedom of movement beyond what is anatomically feasible for humans. Since its first practical application in 1985, the promise of robotics has spurred development and design of numerous such devices for application in neurosurgery. In the current era, the role of robots in neurosurgery is limited to programming movements and planning trajectories for deep cranial targets, biopsies, spinal screw placements, deep brain stimulation, and stereotactic radiosurgery. This narrative, nonsystematic review discusses the evolution of various robotic systems, with a focus on their neurosurgical applications.

Indexed as

computer-aided surgeryevolutionimage-guided surgeryminimally invasive neurosurgeryrobotic neurosurgery

Identifiers

PMID39606290
PMCPMC11588608

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.