MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1935837759 · doi:10.1002/rcs.1440

Accuracy study of a robotic system for MRI‐guided prostate needle placement

2012· article· en· W1935837759 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

VenueInternational Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsImaging phantomRepeatabilityObservational errorError detection and correctionCalibrationComputer scienceError analysisBiomedical engineeringMedicineMathematicsNuclear medicineAlgorithmStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Accurate needle placement is the first concern in percutaneous MRI-guided prostate interventions. In this phantom study, different sources contributing to the overall needle placement error of a MRI-guided robot for prostate biopsy have been identified, quantified and minimized to the possible extent. METHODS: The overall needle placement error of the system was evaluated in a prostate phantom. This error was broken into two parts: the error associated with the robotic system (called 'before-insertion error') and the error associated with needle-tissue interaction (called 'due-to-insertion error'). Before-insertion error was measured directly in a soft phantom and different sources contributing into this part were identified and quantified. A calibration methodology was developed to minimize the 4-DOF manipulator's error. The due-to-insertion error was indirectly approximated by comparing the overall error and the before-insertion error. The effect of sterilization on the manipulator's accuracy and repeatability was also studied. RESULTS: The average overall system error in the phantom study was 2.5 mm (STD = 1.1 mm). The average robotic system error in the Super Soft plastic phantom was 1.3 mm (STD = 0.7 mm). Assuming orthogonal error components, the needle-tissue interaction error was found to be approximately 2.13 mm, thus making a larger contribution to the overall error. The average susceptibility artifact shift was 0.2 mm. The manipulator's targeting accuracy was 0.71 mm (STD = 0.21 mm) after robot calibration. The robot's repeatability was 0.13 mm. Sterilization had no noticeable influence on the robot's accuracy and repeatability. CONCLUSIONS: The experimental methodology presented in this paper may help researchers to identify, quantify and minimize different sources contributing into the overall needle placement error of an MRI-guided robotic system for prostate needle placement. In the robotic system analysed here, the overall error of the studied system remained within the acceptable range.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.260 · 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