ArticleUrologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
[Application and utilization of virtual and augmented reality in surgical specialties-an expert Delphi 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. 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigitalization in healthcare is progressing only slowly in Germany. To counter this trend, four different consensus groups came together as part of the Digital Health Summit in Brandenburg. The aim was to assess the current situation and to formulate demands directed at policymakers and the scientific community in order to advance digitalization.
objectiveThis paper presents the results of the experts' Delphi process on extended reality (XR) in surgical specialties. MATERIALS AND
methodsAs part of the Digital Health Summit Brandenburg 2024, a multistage expert consensus process was conducted with physicians and researchers. Following an initial literature review, statements on the topics of definition, status quo, translation, and utopia were developed and evaluated within a Delphi process.
resultsA total of 31 statements were developed across five categories, the majority of which were endorsed with very strong (41%) or strong (56%) consensus. Participants currently see XR being used primarily in education and training and in surgical planning. For clinical translation, interdisciplinary collaboration as well as the provision of resources and guidelines for clinical integration were key priorities. With regard to optimal use of the technologies, interdisciplinary development as well as mandatory provision and promotion of the technologies were cited.
conclusionXR applications have already been adopted in certain areas of medicine and have demonstrated benefit in specific domains. However, the current framework conditions for developers and healthcare providers are insufficient for widespread implementation in routine clinical practice. In addition to financial and methodological support, there is a particular need to streamline regulatory barriers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42836862What 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.