Skip to main content
Powered by ShareScore

Find research datasets worth reusing

Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.

385

datasets available to search

ShareScore release 0.7.1

Reset

Dataset results

385 results for “robot-assistants”

Learn how ShareScore rates datasets ↗
ClinicalTrials.gov20/100

Flow Controlled Ventilation in Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Surgery

ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT06256900. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 0. Publications: 0.

controlledIPD-YESFeb 2026View details →
zenodo16/100

Dataset related to article "External Validation and Comparison of Two Nomograms Predicting the Probability of Lymph Node Involvement in Patients subjected to Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Concomitant Lymph Node Dissection: A Single Tertiary Center Experience in the MRI-Era "

<p>This record contains raw data related to article &ldquo;External Validation and Comparison of Two Nomograms Predicting the Probability of Lymph Node Involvement in Patients subjected to Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Concomitant Lymph Node Dissection: A Single Tertiary Center Experience in the MRI-Era&quot;</p> <p>Abstract</p> <p><strong>Introduction: </strong> To externally validate and directly compare the performance of the Briganti 2012 and Briganti 2019 nomograms as predictors of lymph node invasion (LNI) in a cohort of patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND).</p> <p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong> After the exclusion of patients with incomplete biopsy, imaging, or clinical data, 752 patients who underwent RARP and ePLND between December 2014 to August 2021 at our center, were included. Among these patients, 327 (43.5%) had undergone multi-parametric MRI (mpMRI) and mpMRI-targeted biopsy. The preoperative risk of LNI was calculated for all patients using the Briganti 2012 nomogram, while the Briganti 2019 nomogram was used only in patients who had performed mpMRI with the combination of targeted and systematic biopsy. The performances of Briganti 2012 and 2019 models were evaluated using the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve analysis, calibrations plot, and decision curve analysis.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong> A median of 13 (IQR 9-18) nodes per patient was removed, and 78 (10.4%) patients had LNI at final pathology. The area under the curves (AUCs) for Briganti 2012 and 2019 were 0.84 and 0.82, respectively. The calibration plots showed a good correlation between the predicted probabilities and the observed proportion of LNI for both models, with a slight tendency to underestimation. The decision curve analysis (DCA) of the two models was similar, with a slightly higher net benefit for Briganti 2012 nomogram. In patients receiving both systematic- and targeted-biopsy, the Briganti 2012 accuracy was 0.85, and no significant difference was found between the AUCs of 2012 and 2019 nomograms (<em>p</em> = 0.296). In the sub-cohort of 518 (68.9%) intermediate-risk PCa patients, the Briganti 2012 nomogram outperforms the 2019 model in terms of accuracy (0.82 vs. 0.77), calibration curve, and net benefit at DCA.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> The direct comparison of the two nomograms showed that the most updated nomogram, which included MRI and MRI-targeted biopsy data, was not significantly more accurate than the 2012 model in the prediction of LNI, suggesting a negligible role of mpMRI in the current population.</p>

restrictedJan 2023View details →
zenodo12/100

Dataset related to article "Robot-assisted rehabilitation of hand function after stroke: Development of prediction models for reference to therapy"

<p>DATASET #1</p> <p>Il data set &egrave; composto da 174 osservazioni riferite ad un campione di n=174 pazienti.</p> <p>Le variabili prese in considerazione per lo studio del data set sono 21:</p> <ul> <li> <p>ID_Pazient: variabile quantitativa continua, indica il numero di identificazione del paziente</p> </li> <li> <p>Sex: variabile dicotomica, indica il sesso del paziente (Maschio=0, Femmina=1)</p> </li> <li> <p>Age: variabile quantitativa continua, indica l&#39;et&agrave; del paziente nel momento in cui &egrave; stata effettuata la valutazione</p> </li> <li> <p>EMG_Control: variabile dicotomica, indica la capacit&agrave; (Si=1) o meno (No=0) del soggetto di controllare il dispositivo con i propri segnali elettromiografici</p> </li> <li> <p>Force_Control: variabile dicotomica, indica la capacit&agrave; (Si=1) o meno (No=0) del paziente di controllare il dispositivo con la propria forza</p> </li> <li> <p>Month_Injury: variabile quantitativa continua, indica i mesi trascorsi dalla data in cui &egrave; avvenuto l&#39;ictus</p> </li> <li> <p>Diagnosis: variabile dicotomica, indica la tipologia di ictus: (Ischemico=0, Emorragico =1)</p> </li> <li> <p>Hemisphere: variabile dicotomica, indica quale emisfero cerebrale &egrave; stato colpito dall&#39;ictus (Destro=0, Sinistro=1)</p> </li> <li> <p>FM_UE: variabile quantitativa discreta, indica la misura della funzione motoria dell&#39;arto superiore determinata somministrando la scala Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity</p> </li> <li> <p>Sensitivity: variabile quantitativa discreta, indica la sezione per la misura della sensibilit&agrave; della scala Fugl-Meyer</p> </li> <li> <p>Pain_ROM: variabile quantitativa discreta, indica la sezione per la misura di articolarit&agrave; e dolore della scala Fugl-Meyer</p> </li> <li> <p>FIM: variabile quantitativa discreta, indica la misura di autonomia della persona nelle attivit&agrave; della vita quotidiana, determinata dalla somministrazione della scala Functional Independence Measure</p> </li> <li> <p>RPS: variabile quantitativa discreta, indica la misura della funzione di raggiungimento di un oggetto</p> </li> <li> <p>Peg_Sec: variabile quantitativa continua, indica la misura della destrezza manuale fine e coincide con il rapporto tra il numero di pioli e i secondi impiegati per inserirli in uno specifico supporto</p> </li> <li> <p>PectMaj: variabile qualitativa ordinata, indica la misura della spasticit&agrave; del pettorale, secondo la Modified Ashworth Scale</p> </li> <li> <p>BicBrach: variabile qualitativa ordinata, indica la misura della spasticit&agrave; del bicipite, secondo la Modified Ashworth Scale</p> </li> <li> <p>FlexCarp: variabile qualitativa ordinata, indica la misura della spasticit&agrave; del flessore del carpo, secondo la Modified Ashworth Scale</p> </li> <li> <p>FlexProfDig: variabile qualitativa ordinata, indica la misura della spasticit&agrave; del flessore profondo delle dita, secondo la Modified Ashworth Scale</p> </li> <li> <p>FlexSupDig: variabile qualitativa ordinata, indica la misura della spasticit&agrave; del flessore superficiale delle dita, secondo la Modified Ashworth Scale</p> </li> <li> <p>Ashworth_TOT: variabile quantitativa discreta, indica la misura totale della Modified Ashworth Scale, data dalla somma delle 5 variabili precedenti</p> </li> <li> <p>BB_par: variabile quantitativa discreta, indica la misura della destrezza manuale grossolana dell&#39;arto paretico</p> </li> </ul>

restrictedSep 2021View details →
zenodo12/100

Dataset related to article "Are nephrometry scores accurate for the prediction of outcomes in patients with renal angiomyolipoma treated with robot-assisted partial nephrectomy? A multi-institutional analysis "

<p>This record contains raw data related to article &ldquo;Are nephrometry scores accurate for the prediction of outcomes in patients with renal angiomyolipoma treated with robot-assisted partial nephrectomy? A multi-institutional analysis&quot;</p> <p><strong>Purpose: </strong> Prediction of complications and surgical outcomes is of outmost importance even in patients with benign renal masses. The aim of our study is to test the PADUA, SPARE and R.E.N.A.L. scores to predict nephron sparing surgery (NSS) outcomes in patients presenting with renal angiomyolipoma (RAML).</p> <p><strong>Methods: </strong> We retrospectively analyzed the clinical and pathological data of 93 patients with AML treated with robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) at three tertiary care referral centers. Renal masses were classified according to the PADUA, SPARE and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores. Surgical success was defined according to the novel Trifecta score. Logistic regression models (LRM) were fitted to predict the achievement of novel Trifecta and the risk of high-grade Clavien-Dindo (CD) complication. The receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was used to estimate the accuracy of LRMs.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong> Of 93 patients, 66 (69.9%) were females; median tumor size was 42 (36-48) mm. Novel Trifecta was achieved in 79 patients (84.9%) and post-operative complications classified as CD&gt;2 occurred in 7 (7.5%) patients. At univariate and multivariate LRMs all three nephrometry scores were significantly associated with novel Trifecta achievement. Similar findings were observed for the prediction of CD&gt;2 complications. The AUCs to predict optimal surgical outcomes and CD&gt;2 complications were 0.791 and 0.912 for PADUA, 0.767 and 0.836 for SPARE and 0.756 and 0.842 for RENAL score, respectively.</p> <p><strong>Conclusions: </strong> RAPN appears to be a feasible and safe surgical technique for the treatment of RAML. PADUA, SPARE and RENAL scores can be safely adopted to predict surgical outcomes, with the first one showing a higher accuracy.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p>

restrictedNov 2022View details →
zenodo8/100

Dataset of paper: Supervised and Dynamic Neuro-Fuzzy Systems to Classify Physiological Responses in Robot-Assisted Neurorehabilitation (PLOS One)

<p>The data set contains number of&nbsp;user, user&#39;s physiological signals (Pulse, SCL, SCR, Respiration rate, Skin temperature), Label, Difficulty level from relax to stress. Label is codified from 1 to 5 corresponding to the Difficulty level.</p>

restrictedApr 2015View details →

ScienceDex guides

Understand access before you commit

These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.

Compare curated datasets

Allen Brain Atlas

Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.

allen-brain-atlas
neuroscienceopenDocumentation, web resources, and API references are available online.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)

ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.

abode-home-cage
behavioral-neuroscienceopenThe DataShare record exposes download links for annotations, documentation, license text, and the zipped per-snippet data directory.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

DANDI Archive for NWB datasets

DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.

dandi-nwb
electrophysiologyopenPublished Dandiset metadata and archive endpoints are available through the production DANDI API.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

International Brain Laboratory public data

The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.

ibl
behavioral-neuroscienceopenPublic sessions can be searched and loaded from the IBL public data server through ONE.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record

OpenNeuro

OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.

openneuro
neuroscienceopenPublished datasets are available on demand over the internet.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record