ArticleUrologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
[Artificial intelligence in surgical disciplines: Clinical application, advantages, and potential-a Delphi expert consensus].
Article in Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. 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.
- [Use of artificial intelligence in clinical practice and hospitals].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) in surgical disciplines has the potential to support all areas of patient care, with the goal of improving treatment quality and patient safety. A group of multidisciplinary experts discussed the current situation as well as steps required to successfully integrate AI into surgical disciplines in the context of a consensus conference at the second Digital Health Summit (Brandenburg an der Havel, Germany) in August 2024.
methodsA modified Delphi procedure was performed with 16 multidisciplinary physicians and scientists on the topic of AI in surgical disciplines and beyond. In two online meetings with subsequent Delphi survey rounds (LimeSurvey) and a final hybrid meeting, individual statements were contributed, discussed, and consented by all 16 participants based on current national clinical guidelines.
resultsFrom a total of 103 submitted statements, 36 statements on reality (n = 12), utopia (n = 13), and opportunities for digital transformation (n = 11) were consented after discussion and modification. We achieved a consensus of at least 75% for all the statements presented, with six of the statements achieving a strong consensus of 100% agreement.
conclusionThe consensus statements show the great potential of AI for improving patient care in surgical disciplines. Challenges such as the lack of digitalization structures and legal frameworks were identified, and practice-oriented proposals for implementation were developed. The need for multidisciplinary cooperation between medical professionals, politics, and industry was emphasized in order to facilitate the German healthcare system remaining competitive for the future, both nationally and internationally.
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.