Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41188412›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026

Computer vision scoring of endoscopically traced line figures in an inanimate scope tip coordination training model.

Neil Mitra, Sanjeev Narasimhan, Mehmet Kerem Turkcan, Zoran Kostic, Yi-Ru Chen, Sarah Choksi, Elizabeth Nilsson-Sjolander, Pablo Palacios, Katie Carsky, Alya Riaz and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

12 authors.

Neil MitraLenox Hill Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, USA. nmitra1@northwell.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-2731-7457
Sanjeev NarasimhanColumibia University, New York, NY, USA.
Mehmet Kerem TurkcanColumibia University, New York, NY, USA.
Zoran KosticColumibia University, New York, NY, USA.
Yi-Ru ChenLenox Hill Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, USA.
Sarah ChoksiAlbany Medical Center, Albany, NY, USA.
Elizabeth Nilsson-SjolanderNorth Shore/LIJ, Northwell Health, New York, NY, USA.
Pablo PalaciosLenox Hill Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, USA.
Katie CarskyLenox Hill Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, USA.
Alya RiazCommonSpirit Health, Dodge City, KS, USA.
Filippo FilicoriLenox Hill Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, USA.
Richard L WhelanLenox Hill Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFine control of the moving scope tip with an instrument extended from the scope tip is a critical skill in performing Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection (ESD) and hybrid ESD/Endoscopic Mucosal Resection (EMR) polypectomy. An inanimate training model has been utilized for several years where trainees trace line figures (e.g., grid, circle, S-shape, and figure of eight) using a sclerotherapy catheter "pen" within a plastic colon tube containing a paper insert. This exercise requires fine coordination similar to that needed for needle knife use. Traced figures are traditionally scored based on completion time and the number of deviations greater than 2 mm from the intended line. This study assesses the efficacy of a computer vision (CV) algorithm versus manual scoring in evaluating these tracings.

methodsA training session involved 8 tracings (4 figures, traced twice) resulting in 352 tracings manually scored for deviations over 2 mm. A CV model was employed to score the tracings by aligning each output with a reference template using perspective transformation. Color space segmentation isolated the ink, and deviations were highlighted by subtracting the tracing from the template. A pixel-based deviation analysis converted pixel distance to millimeters, classifying deviations greater than 2 mm as large deviations for final analysis. Additional morphological processing ensured accurate detection of significant deviations.

resultsOn average, the CV algorithm detected 1.28 more deviations than manual scoring. Detection rates by figure were as follows: grid pattern (1.23), circle (1.27), figure of eight (1.61), and S-shape (1.02). A Bland-Altman plot demonstrated agreement between the CV algorithm and manual scoring, with most deviations falling within the 96% confidence interval (± 1.96 SD). A noted confounder was the variability in pen stroke thickness, which occasionally resulted in thick lines being misconstrued as deviations. The introduction of orienting marks (circular or diamond-shaped) to each tracing facilitated more accurate evaluations.

conclusionThe CV algorithm effectively assessed the accuracy of tracings in the inanimate model by accurately detecting deviations compared to human scoring. Future developments include a CV application that provides real-time feedback for trainees, potentially integrating AI evaluation into advanced endoscopy educational programs.

Indexed as

ColonoscopyEndoscopic Mucosal ResectionAlgorithmsClinical CompetenceHumansComputer visionDeviation detectionEndoscopy trainingImage segmentationSurgical education

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.