ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2026
Safe and usable ensemble formation for networked medical devices: a comparative study of 5G, NFC and pop-up pairing.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeIncorrectly formed medical device ensembles can cause therapy to be performed at the wrong site or display safety-critical data from the wrong patient. This early, exploratory study investigates which wireless ensemble-creation techniques minimize risk while remaining safe and usable in intraoperative workflows. The goal is to identify the most promising methods among 5G, NFC, and pop-up pairing.
methodsEight techniques (5G proximity/location, pop-up pairing, QR Code, Near-Field Communication (NFC) Tag and Reader, device-ID copying, manual selection, device interaction, and SDC context lookup) and five clinical situations (patient bedside, transport, prep room, operating room (OR), post OR) were examined. Five interoperability and clinical experts rated the importance of risk- and usability-related criteria for each situation, as well as how well the criteria are being fulfilled by the different methods. The criteria weights and the method-specific ratings were combined in a quantitative decision matrix to identify the three most promising approaches, which were implemented in a click-dummy prototype and evaluated through formative testing with two clinicians.
resultsThe analysis rated 5G, NFC, and pop-up pairing the highest when combining all categories. Subsequent formative tests with clinicians from the University Hospital Bonn support technical feasibility and highlight clear trade-offs. In this small sample (n = 2), NFC was perceived as the safest and most preferred technique. 5G offered speed and automation potential, but raised critical concerns regarding accuracy. Pop-up pairing was considered flexible yet error-prone when multiple devices entered pairing mode simultaneously.
conclusionThis is a systematic comparison of wireless SDC-ensemble techniques. Early clinical feedback favors NFC for its perceived safety, while 5G and pop-up pairing approaches require additional refinements to mitigate residual risks. As one participant pointed out: "I prefer a reliable and slower over an automated but error-prone method".
Indexed as
Identifiers
41973356What 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.