ArticleWorld journal of urology2025
Concordance among experts in assessing apical mucosal preservation during holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP): implications for artificial intelligence model development.
Article in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preoperative membranous urethral length predicts quality-of-life recovery and urinary incontinence after holmium enucleation of the prostate.World journal of urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo quantify interrater reliability among expert urologists in visually assessing apical mucosal preservation during holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) and to examine the association between preservation ratings and early postoperative continence, thereby informing the design of computer‑vision algorithms.
methodsSixty anonymized video segments from “en‑bloc” HoLEP procedures performed between June 2023 and May 2024 were independently reviewed by six HoLEP surgeons. Each rater classified mucosal integrity as completely preserved, partially preserved, or not preserved. Interrater agreement was quantified with pairwise Cohen’s κ and multi‑rater Fleiss κ. Predictive value for 6‑week continence was evaluated using logistic regression and receiver‑operating‑characteristic (ROC) analysis of consensus ratings.
resultsPairwise Cohen’s κ ranged from 0.07 to 0.44; overall Fleiss κ was 0.18, indicating poor concordance. Agreement was highest between surgeons trained at the same institution (κ 0.44). The partially preserved class accounted for most disagreements. Majority‑vote preservation grade predicted continence poorly (ROC‑AUC 0.60). Observed patterns suggested that worse mucosal preservation tended to coincide with higher incontinence rates, but these trends were exploratory and not suitable for inferential interpretation.
conclusionExpert visual assessment of apical mucosal preservation lacks sufficient reliability to serve as ground truth for supervised computer‑vision training. Given the non-convergent regression model and exploratory nature of observed associations, mucosal-preservation ratings should not be used as inferential predictors. Standardized grading criteria or outcome‑based labels are needed to develop robust AI tools aimed at reducing transient stress urinary incontinence after HoLEP.
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.