Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41252719›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2025

Transforming Surgical Training With AI Techniques for Training, Assessment, and Evaluation: Scoping Review.

David Escobar-Castillejos, Ari Y Barrera-Animas, Julieta Noguez, Alejandra J Magana, Bedrich Benes

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

5 authors.

David Escobar-Castillejos *Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Panamericana, Ciudad de México, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-6583-5274
Ari Y Barrera-Animas *Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Panamericana, Ciudad de México, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-8533-125X
Julieta Noguez *Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México, Mexico.ORCID 0000-0002-6000-3452
Alejandra J Magana *School of Applied and Creative Computing and School of Engineering Education, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6117-7502
Bedrich Benes *Department of Computer Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5293-2112

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) has introduced novel opportunities for assessment and evaluation in surgical training, offering potential improvements that could surpass traditional educational methods.

objectiveThis scoping review examines the integration of AI in surgical training, assessment, and evaluation, aiming to determine how AI technologies can enhance trainees' learning paths and performance by incorporating data-driven insights and predictive analytics. In addition, this review examines the current state and applications of AI algorithms in this field, identifying potential areas for future research.

methodsFollowing the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published between January 2020 and March 18, 2024. Eligibility criteria included English-language full-text articles that investigated the application of AI in surgical training, assessment, or evaluation; non-English texts, reviews, preprints, and studies not addressing AI in surgical education were excluded. After duplicate removal and screening, 56 studies were included in the analysis. Data were structured by categorizing studies according to surgical procedure, AI technique, and training setup. Results were synthesized narratively and summarized in frequency tables.

resultsFrom 1400 initial records, 56 studies met the inclusion criteria. Most were journal articles (84%, 47/56), with the remainder being conference papers (16%, 9/56). AI was most frequently applied in minimally invasive surgery (27%, 15/56), neurosurgery (20%, 11/56), and laparoscopy (16%, 9/56). Common techniques included machine learning (20%, 11/56), clustering (14%, 8/56), deep learning (11%, 6/56), convolutional neural networks (11%, 6/56), and support vector machines (11%, 6/56). Training setups were dominated by simulation platforms (33%, 19/56) and box trainers (24%, 13/56), followed by surgical video analysis (16%, 9/56), and robotic systems such as the da Vinci platform (13%, 7/56). Across studies, AI-enhanced training environments provided automated skill assessment, personalized feedback, and adaptive learning trajectories, with several reporting improvements in trainees' learning curves and technical proficiency. However, heterogeneity in study design and outcome measures limited comparability, and algorithmic transparency was often lacking.

conclusionsThe application of AI in surgical training demonstrates the potential to enhance skill acquisition and support more efficient, personalized, and adaptive learning pathways. Despite encouraging findings, several limitations exist, including small sample sizes, the lack of standardized evaluation metrics, and insufficient external validation of AI models. Future studies should aim to clarify AI methodologies, improve reproducibility, and develop scalable, simulation-based solutions aligned with global education goals.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceGeneral SurgeryClinical CompetenceHumansartificial intelligenceeducational innovationhigher educationmedical trainingperformance assessmentsimulation-based trainingsurgerytechnology-enhanced learning

Identifiers

PMID41252719
PMCPMC12673302

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.