ArticleUrologia internationalis2025
Surgical Preferences and Fears: Misconceptions about Robotic-Assisted Surgery.
Article in Urologia internationalis, 2025. 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.
- Function drives 1-year decision regret in radical prostatectomy: a multicentre prospective study.BJU international · 2026Article
- Impact of non-surgical OR time on efficiency and costs with Hugo™ RAS.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Clinical Efficacy Over Privacy: Public Prioritization of Risk Dimensions in Telesurgery Acceptance Among Young Adults with Higher Education.Telemedicine reportsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND
objectiveRobotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is widely adopted across surgical fields, notably urology, but patient knowledge remains limited, often shaped by misconceptions. Previous research indicates factors like age, profession, and technology use influence RAS perceptions. This study investigates public knowledge, preferences, and misconceptions about RAS within a German cohort.
methodsA cross-sectional survey at a university hospital's open house gathered responses from 339 participants prior to an RAS exhibition. The questionnaire assessed demographics, surgical preferences, and RAS knowledge. Statistical analyses, including t tests, chi-squared tests, ANOVA, and multivariate logistic regression, identified key associations.
resultsA total of 71% (234) of participants favored RAS over conventional surgery, yet misconceptions persisted in 38% (122), particularly among pensioners (48% (46), p < 0.01). Misconceptions were linked to a preference for conventional surgery (43% (52) vs. 19% (36), p < 0.01). Surgical preference emerged as a significant predictor of misconception. Concerns included surgeon skill (41%, 141) and machine malfunction (39%, 132), with younger participants fearing human error and older individuals fearing technical failure (p < 0.01).
conclusionThis local study reveals strong public support for RAS but underscores prevalent misconceptions, especially among older adults, suggesting that addressing misconceptions could foster acceptance and informed decision-making.
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.