ReviewJournal of robotic surgery2026
Economic, resource-use, and adoption signals in the robotic colorectal surgery literature: a bibliometric and visualization study.
Review 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic colorectal surgery has expanded from technical feasibility to broad clinical adoption, but its economic value remains context dependent because costs interact with case selection, conversion, complications, length of stay, long-term outcomes, and health-system structure. We performed a value-oriented bibliometric and visualization analysis of Web of Science Core Collection records retrieved on August 7, 2026, using search concepts spanning economic value, resource use, adoption, implementation, access, and equity. English-language Articles and Review Articles were analyzed with R/bibliometrix-Biblioshiny and CiteSpace 6.4.R1. The final dataset included 484 publications from 2002 through August 7, 2026, comprising 374 articles and 110 reviews from 109 sources and 2,550 authors. Annual output reached 76 publications in 2025, with 53 partial-year records indexed in 2026. The ROLARR trial was the most globally cited document and had the strongest completed citation burst; the most influential documents were predominantly clinical rather than formal economic evaluations. Among the 20 most frequent author keywords, cost occurred 49 times, whereas clinical and procedural terms were substantially more frequent; no clearly independent health-economic cluster emerged from the co-citation or keyword-clustering results. Later temporal signals included cost-effectiveness, adoption, access, and newer platforms, but these topics remained embedded within a predominantly clinical and procedural knowledge structure. Thus, formal economic and equity research is present but comparatively dispersed rather than constituting an autonomous dominant literature. Future studies should integrate prospective costing with quality-adjusted and patient-reported outcomes, learning effects, implementation context, and equitable access.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42747684What 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.