Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

73.6K
Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value. 
73.6K
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

10.9K
Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
10.9K
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

1.4K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
1.4K
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

183
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
183
Statistical Analysis: Overview01:11

Statistical Analysis: Overview

6.2K
When we take repeated measurements on the same or replicated samples, we will observe inconsistencies in the magnitude. These inconsistencies are called errors. To categorize and characterize these results and their errors, the researcher can use statistical analysis to determine the quality of the measurements and/or suitability of the methods.
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...
6.2K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Electrical signatures of divergent connectivity in the human subgenual cingulate cortex.

medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences·2026
Same author

A stereotactic laser interstitial thermal therapy strategy to flank dense calcifications within epileptogenic lesions: illustrative case.

Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons·2026
Same author

Development of an Educational Curriculum for the Surgical Implantation of DBS Systems.

Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society·2026
Same author

AI-based discovery of functional boundaries in the human brain from intraoperative electrophysiology.

medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences·2026
Same author

Sensory Function Improves With Subthalamic Nucleus Stimulation in Parkinson's: A Network Analysis.

Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society·2026
Same author

Broadband synergy versus oscillatory redundancy in the visual cortex.

Nature communications·2026
Same journal

Isocitrate Dehydrogenase-1 Mutation Status and Dynamic Subcortical Motor Mapping Using Ultrasonic Aspirator Stimulation.

Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)·2026
Same journal

The Feasibility of Neuroendoscopic Fenestration in Septated Chronic Subdural Hematoma.

Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)·2026
Same journal

Transforaminal Endoscopic Extradural Onlay Patch Graft Repair of Spontaneous Spinal Type 1a Cerebrospinal Fluid Leaks: A Case Series.

Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)·2026
Same journal

Pretemporal and Posterior Petrosal Approaches to the Retroinfundibular Region: A Quantitative and Comparative Cadaveric Study.

Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)·2026
Same journal

Transcavernous Sinus Transtuber Cinereum Approach for Pure Third Ventricle Craniopharyngioma Resection.

Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)·2026
Same journal

Safety and Radiological Outcomes of Posterior-Based Minimally Invasive Scoliosis Surgery in Young Adult Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Comparative Study Based on Age.

Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 14, 2025

Building An Open-source Robotic Stereotaxic Instrument
11:40

Building An Open-source Robotic Stereotaxic Instrument

Published on: October 29, 2013

14.9K

A General Framework for Characterizing Inaccuracy in Stereotactic Systems.

Michael A Jensen1, Joseph S Neimat2, Panagiotis Kerezoudis1

  • 1Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester , Minnesota , USA.

Operative Neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)
|December 3, 2024
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

A new framework identifies and categorizes sources of targeting error in stereotactic surgery systems. This tool helps analyze inaccuracies across various neurosurgical robotic platforms for improved precision.

More Related Videos

Operative Technique and Nuances for the Stereoelectroencephalographic SEEG Methodology Utilizing a Robotic Stereotactic Guidance System
04:50

Operative Technique and Nuances for the Stereoelectroencephalographic SEEG Methodology Utilizing a Robotic Stereotactic Guidance System

Published on: June 9, 2023

3.5K
Accuracy in Dental Medicine, A New Way to Measure Trueness and Precision
07:57

Accuracy in Dental Medicine, A New Way to Measure Trueness and Precision

Published on: April 29, 2014

13.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 14, 2025

Building An Open-source Robotic Stereotaxic Instrument
11:40

Building An Open-source Robotic Stereotaxic Instrument

Published on: October 29, 2013

14.9K
Operative Technique and Nuances for the Stereoelectroencephalographic SEEG Methodology Utilizing a Robotic Stereotactic Guidance System
04:50

Operative Technique and Nuances for the Stereoelectroencephalographic SEEG Methodology Utilizing a Robotic Stereotactic Guidance System

Published on: June 9, 2023

3.5K
Accuracy in Dental Medicine, A New Way to Measure Trueness and Precision
07:57

Accuracy in Dental Medicine, A New Way to Measure Trueness and Precision

Published on: April 29, 2014

13.4K

Area of Science:

  • Neurosurgery and Medical Robotics
  • Surgical Navigation and Accuracy

Background:

  • Stereotactic procedures require high precision for optimal surgical outcomes.
  • Understanding sources of targeting error is crucial for improving accuracy in stereotactic neurosurgery.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To describe a generic framework for characterizing sources of stereotactic inaccuracy.
  • To provide a unified approach for analyzing targeting errors in stereotactic systems.

Main Methods:

  • Literature search (1969-2024) for studies on stereotactic system inaccuracies.
  • Analysis of 10 stereotactic systems (ROSA, Neuromate, Mazor Renaissance, ExcelsiusGPS, Cirq, STarFix, Nexframe, ClearPoint, CRW, Leksell).
  • Development of a framework based on Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research guidelines.

Main Results:

  • A framework with 5 domains was generated: imaging, registration, mechanical accuracy, target planning and adjustment, and trajectory planning and adjustment.
  • This framework was applied to analyze 10 different stereotactic systems.
  • Detailed illustrations of stereotactic inaccuracies were provided.

Conclusions:

  • The developed framework serves as a rubric for analyzing stereotactic system errors.
  • Conceptual understanding of error sources aids practitioners in applying the framework to their specific stereotactic systems.
  • This work aims to enhance the accuracy and outcomes of stereotactic surgical procedures.