Exploring Eye‐tracking Technology as an Assessment Tool for Point‐of‐care Ultrasound Training
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: Eye-tracking technology has emerged as a potentially useful learner assessment tool in several medical specialties. In the fields of general surgery and anesthesiology, it has been shown to reliably differentiate between different levels of expertise in procedural skills. In the field of radiology, it has been shown to be a valid assessment tool for diagnostic test interpretation. Current methods of competency assessment in point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) remain a challenge, because they require significant direct observation time by an instructor. The purpose of this study was to determine if eye-tracking technology can accurately distinguish between novice and experts in the interpretation of POCUS clips, specifically of the focused assessment using sonography in trauma (FAST) scan. METHODS: A convenience sample of medical students, residents, and emergency physicians from a single academic emergency department were invited to participate. Participants included both novices and experts in POCUS. Each participant completed a baseline questionnaire and viewed 16 video clips of a FAST ultrasound examination while their gaze patterns were recorded by a commercially available eye-tracking device. The primary outcome was total gaze time on the area of interest (AOI). Secondary outcomes included total time to fixation, mean number of fixations, and mean duration of first fixation on the AOI. RESULTS: Fifteen novices and 15 experts completed this study. For total gaze time on the AOI, experts fixated their gaze significantly longer than novices (75.8 ± 16.2 seconds vs. 56.6 ± 12.8 seconds, p = 0.001). Similarly, experts were significantly faster to fixate on the AOI and had a higher fixation count on the AOI (8.5 ± 4.0 seconds vs. 15.1 ± 6.8 seconds, p = 0.003; and 170 ± 30 vs. 143 ± 28 seconds, p = 0.016). There were no differences on the mean duration of first fixation on the AOI (0.42 ± 0.12 seconds vs. 0.39 ± 0.09 seconds, p = 0.467). CONCLUSION: Eye-tracking technology shows the potential to differentiate between experts and novices by their gaze patterns on video clips of FAST examinations. The total gaze time on the AOI may be a useful metric to help in the assessment of competency in POCUS image interpretation. In addition, the evaluation of gaze patterns may help educators identify causes of interpretation errors. Future studies are needed to further validate these metrics in a larger cohort.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle