↓ Skip to main content

Robotic surgery in children: adopt now, await, or dismiss?

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Surgery International, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
Robotic surgery in children: adopt now, await, or dismiss?
Published in
Pediatric Surgery International, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00383-015-3800-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas P. Cundy, Hani J. Marcus, Archie Hughes-Hallett, Sanjeev Khurana, Ara Darzi

Abstract

The role of robot-assisted surgery in children remains controversial. This article aims to distil this debate into an evidence informed decision-making taxonomy; to adopt this technology (1) now, (2) later, or (3) not at all. Robot-assistance is safe, feasible and effective in selected cases as an adjunctive tool to enhance capabilities of minimally invasive surgery, as it is known today. At present, expectations of rigid multi-arm robotic systems to deliver higher quality care are over-estimated and poorly substantiated by evidence. Such systems are associated with high costs. Further comparative effectiveness evidence is needed to define the case-mix for which robot-assistance might be indicated. It seems unlikely that we should expect compelling patient benefits when it is only the mode of minimally invasive surgery that differs. Only large higher-volume institutions that share the robot amongst multiple specialty groups are likely to be able to sustain higher associated costs with today's technology. Nevertheless, there is great potential for next-generation surgical robotics to enable better ways to treat childhood surgical diseases through less invasive techniques that are not possible today. This will demand customized technology for selected patient populations or procedures. Several prototype robots exclusively designed for pediatric use are already under development. Financial affordability must be a high priority to ensure clinical accessibility.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 45 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 18 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 30%
Engineering 5 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 24 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,347,611
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Surgery International
#570
of 1,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,613
of 274,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Surgery International
#9
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,253 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 274,283 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.