ArticleJTCVS open2025
Objective performance indicators provide a novel, quantitative method to evaluate surgeon proficiency in robotic lobectomy training.
Article in JTCVS open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ruling the robot: a phase-based analysis of resident autonomy across core robotic general surgery procedures.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Measurement of trainee autonomy in robotic-assisted lung resections using objective performance indicators.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Performance using a visuo-haptic surgical simulator is affected by age.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Current evaluation of robotic surgeon proficiency relies on subjective assessment. The robotic platform collects highly granular kinematic data on surgeon activity, known as objective performance indicators (OPIs). We sought to compare surgeon proficiency during lobectomies across training levels using OPIs. Methods: Under institutional review board approval, we analyzed robotic lobectomies between November 2022 and February 2023 performed by 2 expert robotic thoracic surgeons (>200 robotic lobectomies) and their trainees using OPI recorders. A professional annotator segmented each case into standardized steps, and an operating surgeon (trainee or attending) was assigned to that step on the basis of the active console. Kinematic data were compared between surgeon groups. A subgroup analysis was performed dividing the trainee group into junior (postgraduate year 3-5) and senior residents (postgraduate year 6-8). Results: In total, 26 lobectomies with 410 discrete tasks performed by attending surgeons and 344 by trainees were included. In the attending group, there were significantly greater rates of camera clutching per minute compared with trainees (2.94 vs 2.52, respectively; Conclusions: There are significant differences in objective performance indicators between expert and beginner robotic surgeons. These results demonstrate the feasibility of incorporating kinematic performance data into thoracic surgeon assessment in a clinical setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.