International expert consensus on the current status and future prospects of artificial intelligence in metabolic and bariatric surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming the landscape of medicine, including surgical science and practice. The evolution of AI from rule-based systems to advanced machine learning and deep learning algorithms has opened new avenues for its application in metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS). AI has the potential to enhance various aspects of MBS, including education and training, decision-making, procedure planning, cost and time efficiency, optimization of surgical techniques, outcome and complication prediction, patient education, and access to care. However, concerns persist regarding the reliability of AI-generated decisions and associated ethical considerations. This study aims to establish a consensus on the role of AI in MBS using a modified Delphi method. A panel of 68 leading metabolic and bariatric surgeons from 35 countries participated in this consensus-building process, providing expert insights into the integration of AI in MBS. Of the 28 statements evaluated, a consensus of at least 70% was achieved for all, with 25 statements reaching consensus in the first round and the remaining three in the second round. Experts agreed that AI has the potential to enhance the evaluation of surgical skills in MBS by providing objective, detailed assessments, enabling personalized feedback, and accelerating the learning curve. Most experts also recognized AI's role in identifying qualified candidates for MBS referrals, helping patient and procedure selection, and addressing specific clinical questions. However, concerns were raised about the potential overreliance on AI-generated recommendations. The consensus emphasized the need for ethical guidelines governing AI use and the inclusion of AI's role in decision-making within the patient consent process. Furthermore, the results suggest that AI education should become an essential component of future surgical training. Advancements in AI-driven robotics and AI-integrated genomic applications were also identified as promising developments that could significantly shape the future of MBS.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".