Development of a physical shoulder simulator for the training of basic arthroscopic skills
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Orthopaedic training programs are incorporating arthroscopic simulations into their residency curricula. There is a need for a physical shoulder simulator that accommodates lateral decubitus and beach chair positions, has realistic anatomy, allows for an objective measure of performance and provides feedback to trainees. METHODS: A physical shoulder simulator was developed for training basic arthroscopic skills. Sensors were embedded in the simulator to provide a means to assess performance. Subjects of varying skill level were invited to use the simulator and their performance was objectively assessed. RESULTS: Novice subjects improved their performance after practice with the simulator. A survey completed by experts recognized the simulator as a valuable tool for training basic arthroscopic skills. CONCLUSIONS: The physical shoulder simulator helps train novices in basic arthroscopic skills and provides objective measures of performance. By using the physical shoulder simulator, residents could improve their basic arthroscopic skills, resulting in improved patient safety.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it