Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The Web site “Web-Based Bronchoscopy Simulator” located at www.thoracicanesthesia.com was created by Drs. Kanellakos, Dugas, and Slinger from the University of Toronto. This is a very interesting and informative Web site whose most outstanding feature is the actual bronchoscopic simulation and bronchial anatomy test, all free of charge. However, the Web site has much more information than just the simulation and test. The initial part of the Web site is organized into sections by subject or dates – under these sections there are article abstracts and lectures about multiple topics in thoracic anesthesia. Of note, this is organized in a cross-referenced system, so that the same article may appear under a descriptor such as “Analgesia” as well as under a date such as “August 2008.” A review of the articles showed a great selection and breadth of thoracic topics of interest to anesthesiologists, ranging from older classic articles to the most recent journal publications. These articles and lectures can form the platform for robust discussions with colleagues or educational sessions with fellows and residents caring for complex thoracic surgical patients. The highlight of this Web site is located as one scrolls to the bottom of the site – the bronchoscopy simulator. However, to access the simulator, one must first complete a bronchial anatomy quiz, which the reviewers found challenging. Once the quiz is complete, with appropriate answers given for incorrect responses, one can move on to the bronchoscopy simulator. Although anxiety provoking, the use of a pre-test of bronchial anatomical knowledge to compare to a post-test of that knowledge is very useful for determining the effectiveness of this activity and individually to determine how much one has actually learned. Of note, the bronchial anatomy quiz is also difficult, as it is static with photos only, in distinction to the bronchial simulator, which is in motion. The figure below shows a sample bronchial anatomy quiz question.FigureOnce one enters the bronchoscopy simulator, multiple choices are given for using the simulator and how to drive the simulated bronchoscope. The guide diagram (shown in the column to the right) illustrates the location in the bronchial tree that one is viewing at any particular time. From there, one can choose to use the simulator with or without labels (great for teaching) and in various formats. The steering was useful and accurate as were the explanatory icons. Although not quite as realistic as using an actual bronchoscope, the ability to appear to move in three dimensions allowed one to learn the distal anatomy within the context of how one arrived at a particular location. Once done with the simulator, one is directed to take the post simulator test. Afterward, the program provides a useful breakdown about an individual's score relative to others who have used the Web site. The figure below shows a sample bronchoscopy anatomical view with and without labels.FigureWe have only very minor criticisms or suggestions for this site. The program teaches much more than the anesthesiologist needs to know to safely conduct a thoracic anesthetic or properly position a double lumen endotracheal tube/bronchial blocker. This is not a real problem but may be disconcerting to established practioners who are not facile at identifying the subsegmental anatomy of the bronchial tree. Since much of a practioner's time is spent properly achieving lung separation, it might be useful to include a video of how to place a double lumen tube or bronchial blocker to accompany the simulator. There are a few minor improvements that could be made, such as being able to enlarge the simulator to the size of the entire computer screen and making sure that all of the descriptions are easy to read. Overall, this is a wonderful learning and teaching tool. It is useful for those in practice, fellows, residents, and students alike. As educators, it is extraordinary to be able to teach bronchoscopic anatomy and landmarks in the OR in a relaxed manner that is conducive to discussion, instead of while struggling to properly position a double lumen endotracheal tube! Katherine Grichnik, MD Professor of Anesthesia Duke University Durham, NC [email protected] Susan Martinelli, MD Assistant Professor of Anesthesia University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, NC [email protected]
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,602 | 0,532 |
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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».