ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2025
Surgeons versus computer vision: a comparative analysis on surgical phase recognition capabilities.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications of Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Surgical Robotics: A Systematic Review.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence system for anatomical landmark detection in rectovaginal fistula repair surgery: technical development and educational evaluation.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026Article
- Comparing artificial intelligence and healthcare professional performance in surgical and interventional video analysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAutomated surgical phase recognition (SPR) uses artificial intelligence (AI) to segment the surgical workflow into its key events, functioning as a building block for efficient video review, surgical education as well as skill assessment. Previous research has focused on short and linear surgical procedures and has not explored if temporal context influences experts' ability to better classify surgical phases. This research addresses these gaps, focusing on robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) as a highly nonlinear procedure.
methodsUrologists of varying expertise were grouped and tasked to indicate the surgical phase for RAPN on both single frames and video snippets using a custom-made web platform. Participants reported their confidence levels and the visual landmarks used in their decision-making. AI architectures without and with temporal context as trained and benchmarked on the Cholec80 data set were subsequently trained on this RAPN data set.
resultsVideo snippets and presence of specific visual landmarks improved phase classification accuracy across all groups. Surgeons displayed high confidence in their classifications and outperformed novices, who struggled discriminating phases. The performance of the AI models is comparable to the surgeons in the survey, with improvements when temporal context was incorporated in both cases.
conclusionSPR is an inherently complex task for expert surgeons and computer vision, where both perform equally well when given the same context. Performance increases when temporal information is provided. Surgical tools and organs form the key landmarks for human interpretation and are expected to shape the future of automated SPR.
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.