ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2025
Assessment of cognitive load in the context of neurosurgery.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeImage-guided neurosurgery demands precise depth perception to minimize cognitive burden during intricate navigational tasks. Existing evaluation methods rely heavily on subjective user feedback, which can be biased and inconsistent. This study uses a physiological measure via electroencephalography (EEG), to quantify cognitive load when using novel dynamic depth-cue visualizations. By comparing dynamic versus static rendering techniques, we aim to establish an objective framework for assessing and validating visualization strategies beyond traditional performance metrics.
methodsTwenty participants (experts in brain imaging) navigated to specified targets within a computed tomography angiography (CTA) volume using a tracked 3D pointer. We implemented three visualization methods (shading, ChromaDepth, aerial perspective) in both static and dynamic modes, randomized across 80 trials per subject. Continuous EEG was recorded via a Muse headband; raw signals were preprocessed and theta-band (4-7 Hz) power extracted for each trial. A two-way repeated measures ANOVA assessed the effects of visualization type and dynamic interaction on theta power.
resultsDynamic visualization conditions yielded lower mean theta-band power compared to static conditions (Δ = 0.057 V2/Hz; F (1,19) = 6.00, p = 0.024), indicating reduced neural markers of cognitive load. No significant main effect was observed across visualization methods, nor their interaction with dynamic mode. These findings suggest that real-time feedback from pointer-driven interactions may alleviate mental effort regardless of the specific depth cue employed.
conclusionOur exploratory results demonstrate the feasibility of using consumer-grade EEG to provide objective insights into cognitive load for surgical visualization techniques. Although limited by non-surgeon participants, the observed theta-power reductions under dynamic conditions support further investigation. Future work should correlate EEG-derived load measures with performance outcomes, involve practising neurosurgeons, and leverage high-density EEG or AI-driven adaptive visualization to refine and validate these preliminary findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40650801What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.