ReviewInternational journal of colorectal disease2026
Training and credentialing in robotic general surgery.
Review in International journal of colorectal disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Technology-enhanced training in basic robotic surgical skills: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Medicolegal aspects of robotic-assisted surgery: litigation trends, complication risks, and human factors interventions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRobotic-assisted surgery is now embedded across many domains of general surgery; however, training and credentialing frameworks have not evolved at the same pace as technological adoption. As a result, significant variability exists in access to training, definitions of competency and proficiency, assessment standards, and institutional credentialing practices. These inconsistencies raise concerns regarding patient safety, equity of access, and workforce preparedness, particularly in the context of expanding robotic platforms and parallel learning curves among trainees and established surgeons.
methodsThis narrative review aims to (1) clarify and define key concepts relevant to robotic surgical training, including competency, proficiency, benchmarking, and credentialing; (2) synthesise current barriers to effective robotic training across the surgical career continuum; and (3) propose a structured, standardised, and platform-agnostic credentialing pathway for robotic general surgery. Drawing on published literature and international consensus work, we identify challenges related to system access, lack of standardisation, training capacity, service pressures, and limited use of objective performance metrics and feedback mechanisms.
resultsWe propose a competency-based credentialing framework incorporating simulation-based foundational training, modular procedural progression, non-technical skills development, structured mentorship, and objective assessment using validated metrics. The pathway is designed to be adaptable across institutions and applicable to both surgical trainees and consultants, while remaining independent of vendor-specific credentialing models.
conclusionEstablishing a standardised approach to robotic training and credentialing is essential to ensure safe implementation, support proficiency development, and enable equitable access to robotic surgery. Coordinated action from professional bodies, training institutions, and healthcare systems will be required to deliver a future-ready robotic surgical workforce.
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.