ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Institutional availability, training resources, and supervised participation in robot-assisted surgery among Polish urology residents: a nationwide survey.
Article 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) has expanded rapidly in Poland, but its integration into resident education remains uncertain. In a nationwide anonymous 35-question survey sent to 390 Polish urology residents, 156 completed it (40.0%). Among respondents, 110 (70.5%) reported RAS availability in their training centre; 56 (35.9%) reported robotic training access, 43 (27.6%) a robotic course, 46 (29.5%) simulator availability, 76 (48.7%) assistant participation, and 16 (10.3%) a supervised robotic procedure or procedural step. All respondents with training access were in RAS centres. Among these 110 respondents, course attendance (aOR 5.38, 95% CI 2.05-14.14) and simulator availability (aOR 3.90, 95% CI 1.54-9.89) were associated with access. Training access was associated with assistant participation (aOR 6.66, 95% CI 3.06-14.50), higher current and expected self-rated skill (common aORs 12.30 and 12.15), and at least satisfactory training satisfaction (aOR 17.01, 95% CI 6.35-45.57). All 16 such reports occurred among residents with access; in an exploratory conditional Firth model, each additional residency year was associated with this outcome (aOR 2.11, 95% CI 1.30-3.97). Items were independent, not sequential stages. Institutional adoption exceeded reported training access and supervised participation. Broad survey content makes participation driven solely by robotics interest less likely, but the 40.0% completion proportion, self-report, unmeasured trainee selection, and rare supervised outcome limit inference.
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.