MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407948542 · doi:10.1126/scirobotics.adq0192

Telesurgery and the importance of context

2025· review· en· W4407948542 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

VenueScience Robotics · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoftware deploymentContext (archaeology)Computer scienceKey (lock)Realization (probability)Risk analysis (engineering)Data scienceManagement scienceEngineeringMedicineComputer securitySoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Telesurgery has the potential to overcome geographical barriers in surgical care, encouraging its deployment in areas with sparse surgical expertise. Despite successful in-human experiments and substantial technological progress, the adoption of telesurgery remains slow. In this Review, we analyze the reasons for this slow adoption. First, we identify various contexts for telesurgery and highlight the vastly different requirements for their realization. We then discuss why procedures with high urgency and skill sparsity are particularly suitable for telesurgery. Last, we summarize key research areas essential for further progress. The goal of this Review is to provide the reader with a comprehensive analysis of the current state of telesurgery research and to provide guidance for faster adoption of this exciting technology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.312 · 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