MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400228137 · doi:10.1097/as9.0000000000000459

Consensus for Operating Room Multimodal Data Management: Identifying Research Priorities for Data-Driven Surgery

2024· article· en· W4400228137 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfUniversiteit StellenboschHumanitas UniversityMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreFundação ChampalimaudVanderbilt University Medical CenterDeutsches KrebsforschungszentrumInselspital, Universitätsspital BernCentral Michigan UniversityAgence Nationale de la RechercheTufts Medical CenterUniversité de StrasbourgVanderbilt University
KeywordsData scienceComputer scienceMedicineMedical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: This study aimed to identify research areas that demand attention in multimodal data-driven surgery for improving data management in minimally invasive surgery. Background: New surgical procedures, high-tech equipment, and digital tools are increasingly being introduced, potentially benefiting patients and surgical teams. These innovations have resulted in operating rooms evolving into data-rich environments, which, in turn, requires a thorough understanding of the data pipeline for improved and more intelligent real-time data usage. As this new domain is vast, it is necessary to identify where efforts should be focused on developing seamless and practical data usage. Methods: A modified electronic Delphi approach was used; 53 investigators were divided into the following groups: a research group (n=9) for problem identification and a narrative literature review, a medical and technical expert group (n=14) for validation, and an invited panel (n=30) for two electronic survey rounds. Round 1 focused on a consensus regarding bottlenecks in surgical data science areas and research gaps, while round 2 prioritized the statements from round 1, and a roadmap was created based on the identified essential and very important research gaps. Results: Consensus panelists have identified key research areas, including digitizing operating room (OR) activities, improving data streaming through advanced technologies, uniform protocols for handling multimodal data, and integrating AI for efficiency and safety. The roadmap prioritizes standardizing OR data formats, integrating OR data with patient information, ensuring regulatory compliance, standardizing surgical AI models, and securing data transfers in the next generation of wireless networks. Conclusions: This work is an international expert consensus regarding the current issues and key research targets in the promising field of data-driven surgery, highlighting the research needs of many operating room stakeholders with the aim of facilitating the implementation of novel patient care strategies in minimally invasive surgery.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.797
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.229 · 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