Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40958429›Full record

ArticleColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2025

The ACPGBI AI taskforce report: A mixed-methods roadmap for AI in colorectal surgery.

James M Kinross, Kyle Lam, Andrew Yiu, Katie Adams, Kiran Altaf, Elaine Burns, Mindy Duffourc, Nicola Eardley, Charles Evans, Stamatia Giannarou and 19 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The ACPGBI AI taskforce report: A mixed-methods roadmap for AI in colorectal surgery.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2025
    Article
  3. 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

29 authors.

James M KinrossDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Kyle LamDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6407-4912
Andrew YiuDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Katie AdamsDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Kiran AltafDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Elaine BurnsDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Mindy DuffourcFaculty of Law, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Nicola EardleyFaculty of Health, Medicine and Society, University of Chester, Chester, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6528-4292
Charles EvansDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK.
Stamatia GiannarouDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Laura HancockDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Victoria HuDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Ahsan JavedDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK.
Shivank KhareDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Evangelos MazomenosDepartment of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK.
Linnet McGeeverDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, NHS Forth Valley, Stirling, Scotland.
Susan MougDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Royal Alexandra Hospital, Paisley, Scotland.
Piero NastroDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust, Dartford, UK.
Sebastien OurselinSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Subramanian RamamoorthySchool of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Campbell RoxburghSchool of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Catherine SimisterDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Danail StoyanovDepartment of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, London, UK.
Gregory ThomasDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, St Mark's - The National Bowel Hospital, London, UK.
Pietro ValdastriSchool of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Marcus VassOsborne Clarke LLP, London, UK.
Dale VimalachandranDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Tom VercauterenSchool of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
Justin DaviesDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThe ACPGBI has commissioned a taskforce to devise a strategy for integrating artificial intelligence (AI) into colorectal surgery. This report aims to (i) map current AI adoption amongst UK colorectal surgeons; (ii) evaluate knowledge, attitudes, perceptions and experience of AI technologies; and (iii) establish priority recommendations to drive innovation across the specialty.

methodsA prospective 45-item questionnaire was circulated to the ACPGBI membership. Questionnaire findings were explored at a multidisciplinary round table of surgeons, allied professionals, computer scientists and lawyers. Strategic recommendations were then generated.

results122 members responded (75.4% consultants; 72.1% male; modal age 41-50 years). Although 43.5% used AI daily, only one third said they could explain key concepts within AI. 86.9% anticipated routine future-AI use, with documentation and imaging ranked highest. 88.5% endorsed formal AI training. Major obstacles were unclear regulation, cost, medicolegal liability and professional or patient distrust. The round table generated 17 recommendations across clinical, educational and research domains and a ten-point action plan, including the establishment of a Colorectal AI Committee and the creation of an open-source colorectal foundational data initiative.

conclusionThis taskforce report combines questionnaire insights from the ACPGBI membership and expert debate into 17 key recommendations and a ten-point action plan that will set the direction of future colorectal AI practice. The objective is to establish a framework through which colorectal surgical practice can be augmented by safe, trustworthy AI.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceColorectal SurgeryAdultAdvisory CommitteesAttitude of Health PersonnelFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesSurgeonsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Kingdomartificial intelligencefoundational datasetsgenerative AIimplementation strategymachine learningsurgical educationsurgical innovation

Identifiers

PMID40958429
PMCPMC12441474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.