Observational studyJournal of robotic surgery2026
Perception-reality gap profiles in robot-assisted gynecologic surgery: implications for preoperative counseling among Chinese women.
Observational study in Journal of robotic 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robot-assisted gynecologic surgery (RAGS) is increasingly used in China, but public understanding of its value relative to conventional laparoscopic surgery (LS) may diverge from clinical evidence. This divergence may affect women's behavioral intention toward RAGS and create challenges for preoperative counseling. This study combined survey data from 546 Chinese adult women with a procedure-specific institutional benchmark derived from 536 radical hysterectomy cases at a tertiary hospital. Perception-reality gap (PRG) were then constructed for six perioperative outcomes, including postoperative complications, length of stay, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, surgical treatment cost, and hospitalization cost. K-means clustering and hierarchical multiple regression were performed. Four PRG profiles were identified: clinical benefit, comprehensively optimistic, comprehensively conservative, and clinically aligned profiles, accounting for 19.1%, 33.7%, 17.8%, and 29.5% of participants, respectively. Behavioral intention differed significantly across profiles. The comprehensively optimistic profile showed the highest behavioral intention, followed by the comprehensively conservative profile. This pattern suggests that women with less favorable benchmark-referenced perceptions may still remain open to robotic surgery. Hierarchical regression showed that PRG indicators had incremental explanatory value beyond demographic factors and technology acceptance-related perceptions. In the full model, the PRG indicators for hospitalization cost and length of stay were positive predictors, whereas the PRG indicator for operative time was a negative predictor. These findings suggest that PRG profiles may help surgeons and counseling teams recognize heterogeneous perceptions, calibrate expectations, and tailor counseling communication strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42474596What 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.