MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1536902481 · doi:10.1002/lary.24919

Comparison of cadaveric and isomorphic three‐dimensional printed models in temporal bone education

2015· article· en· W1536902481 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Laryngoscope · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
Keywords3d printedCadaveric spasmOtorhinolaryngologyTemporal boneLikert scaleComputer scienceMedical physicsMedicineBiomedical engineeringOrthodonticsSurgeryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Current three-dimensional (3D) printed simulations are complicated by insufficient void spaces and inconsistent density. We describe a novel simulation with focus on internal anatomic fidelity and evaluate against template/identical cadaveric education. STUDY DESIGN: Research ethics board-approved prospective cohort study. METHODS: Generation of a 3D printed temporal bone was performed using a proprietary algorithm that deconstructs the digital model into slices prior to printing. This supplemental process facilitates removal of residual material from air-containing spaces and permits requisite infiltrative access to the all regions of the model. Ten otolaryngology trainees dissected a cadaveric temporal bone (CTB) followed by a matched/isomorphic 3D printed bone model (PBM), based on derivative micro-computed tomography data. Participants rated 1) physical characteristics, 2) specific anatomic constructs, 3) usefulness in skill development, and 4) perceived educational value. The survey instrument employed a seven-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Trainees felt physical characteristics of the PBM were quite similar to CTB, with highly ranked cortical (5.5 ± 1.5) and trabecular (5.2 ± 1.3) bone drill quality. The overall model was considered comparable to CTB (5.9 ± 0.74), with respectable air cell reproduction (6.1 ± 1.1). Internal constructs were rated as satisfactory (range, 4.9-6.2). The simulation was considered a beneficial training tool for all types of mastoidectomy (range, 5.9-6.6), posterior tympanotomy (6.5 ± 0.71), and skull base approaches (range, 6-6.5). Participants believed the model to be an effective training instrument (6.7 ± 0.68), which should be incorporated into the temporal bone lab (7.0 ± 0.0). The PBM was thought to improve confidence (6.7 ± 0.68) and operative performance (6.7 ± 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: Study participants found the PBM to be an effective platform that compared favorably to CTB. The model was considered a valuable adjunctive training tool with both realistic mechanical and visual character. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it