| Title |
Effects of robotic manipulators on movements of novices and surgeons
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-014-3446-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ilana Nisky, Allison M. Okamura, Michael H. Hsieh |
| Abstract |
Robot-assisted surgery is widely adopted for many procedures but has not realized its full potential to date. Based on human motor control theories, the authors hypothesized that the dynamics of the master manipulators impose challenges on the motor system of the user and may impair performance and slow down learning. Although studies have shown that robotic outcomes are correlated with the case experience of the surgeon, the relative contribution of cognitive versus motor skill is unknown. This study quantified the effects of da Vinci Si master manipulator dynamics on movements of novice users and experienced surgeons and suggests possible implications for training and robot design. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 90 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 30% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 22 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 39 | 42% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 16% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 24 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 April 2021.
All research outputs
#13,054,270
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#2,667
of 6,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,431
of 313,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#95
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,019 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,178 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.