Transforming work practices of operating room teams: the case of the Da Vinci robot
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Information systems researchers interested in the materiality of digital technology have frequently emphasized the need to study work practices and take a sociomaterial perspective on practice change. We address this need in our study on the introduction of a Da Vinci robot, an endoscopic surgical system for minimally invasive surgery, in a hospital operating theatre. Building on the insights from an ethnographic study in a major teaching hospital, we report on the process of how surgery practice changed following the introduction of the Da Vinci robot. We suggest that the robot brings about a new spatial distribution of roles and activities next to and away from the patients' body, mediates and transforms existing work relations, thus forcing a new order of space use, altering visibility and yielding expertise movement. Our findings have implications for understanding how digital technology transforms work practices in general and in complex medical teamwork in particular.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it