MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400226783 · doi:10.7759/cureus.63699

The Future of Artificial Intelligence in Surgery

2024· review· en· W4400226783 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Until recently, innovations in surgery were largely represented by extensions or augmentations of the surgeon's perception. This includes advancements such as the operating microscope, tumor fluorescence, intraoperative ultrasound, and minimally invasive surgical instrumentation. However, introducing artificial intelligence (AI) into the surgical disciplines represents a transformational event. Not only does AI contribute substantively to enhancing a surgeon's perception with such methodologies as three-dimensional anatomic overlays with augmented reality, AI-improved visualization for tumor resection, and AI-formatted endoscopic and robotic surgery guidance. What truly makes AI so different is that it also provides ways to augment the surgeon's cognition. By analyzing enormous databases, AI can offer new insights that can transform the operative environment in several ways. It can enable preoperative risk assessment and allow a better selection of candidates for procedures such as organ transplantation. AI can also increase the efficiency and throughput of operating rooms and staff and coordinate the utilization of critical resources such as intensive care unit beds and ventilators. Furthermore, AI is revolutionizing intraoperative guidance, improving the detection of cancers, permitting endovascular navigation, and ensuring the reduction in collateral damage to adjacent tissues during surgery (e.g., identification of parathyroid glands during thyroidectomy). AI is also transforming how we evaluate and assess surgical proficiency and trainees in postgraduate programs. It offers the potential for multiple, serial evaluations, using various scoring systems while remaining free from the biases that can plague human supervisors. The future of AI-driven surgery holds promising trends, including the globalization of surgical education, the miniaturization of instrumentation, and the increasing success of autonomous surgical robots. These advancements raise the prospect of deploying fully autonomous surgical robots in the near future into challenging environments such as the battlefield, disaster areas, and even extraplanetary exploration. In light of these transformative developments, it is clear that the future of surgery will belong to those who can most readily embrace and harness the power of AI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.153
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it