Teaching medical students and residents how to inject local anesthesia almost painlessly
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
The objective of the present study was to determine whether it is possible to consistently and reliably teach medical students and resident learners how to administer local anesthetics in an almost painless manner. Using the published technique, 25 consecutive medical students and residents were taught how to inject local anesthetics for carpal tunnel release by watching the senior author perform the technique once. The learner then independently administered the anesthesia to the next patient who then scored the learner's ability to inject the local anesthetic from a pain perspective. The teaching technique is demonstrated in an accompanying online video. The learners were consistently capable of administering local anesthetics with minimal pain. During the injection process, the patients only felt pain once ('hole-in-one') 76% of the time. This pain was attributed to the first 27-gauge needle poke. The other 24% of the time, patients felt pain twice (eagle) during the 5 min injection process. All 25 patients rated the entire pain experience to be less than 2/10. Eighty-four per cent of the patients indicated that the experience was better than local anesthetic given at the dentist's office. Medical students and residents can quickly and reliably learn how to administer local anesthesia for carpal tunnel release with minimal pain to the patient.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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