ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Reply to "Critical appraisal of "Proposal for the Hernia ASCEND Hugo™ RAS training pathway: acquisition of skills by comprehensive exercise‑based nimbleness and dexterity training"".
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We appreciate the constructive comments by Haider et al. regarding our proposal for the Hernia ASCEND Hugo™ RAS training pathway. Their observations underscore key priorities for the ongoing refinement and validation of structured robotic hernia training. In our reply, we emphasize that the ASCEND framework is grounded in the Proficiency-Based Progression (PBP) model, which has demonstrated measurable improvements in surgical performance and safety across multiple specialties. We clarify that while our initial report did not include outcome data, multicenter validation studies linking ASCEND milestones to clinical endpoints are in progress. Moreover, we address concerns about generalizability and cost, reaffirming that ASCEND was independently designed by surgical educators and conceived as a modular and scalable program adaptable to diverse healthcare settings. We share the view that long-term validation should be guided by independent scientific societies to ensure neutrality and global comparability. Through these initiatives, ASCEND aims to contribute to the standardized, outcome-driven, and accessible adoption of robotic hernia surgery worldwide.
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.