Development and validation of a virtual reality transrectal ultrasound guided prostatic biopsy simulator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We present the design, reliability, face, content and construct validity testing of a virtual reality simulator for transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), which allows doctors-in-training to perform multiple different biopsy schemes. METHODS: This biopsy system design uses a regular "end-firing" TRUS probe. Movements of the probe are tracked with a micro-magnetic sensor to dynamically slice through a phantom patient's 3D prostate volume to provide real-time continuous TRUS views. 3D TRUS scans during prostate biopsy clinics were recorded. Intrinsic reliability was assessed by comparing the left side of the prostate to the right side of the prostate for each biopsy. A content and face validity questionnaire was administered to 26 doctors to assess the simulator. Construct validity was assessed by comparing notes from experts and novices with regards to the time taken and the accuracy of each biopsy. RESULTS: Imaging data from 50 patients were integrated into the simulator. The completed VR TRUS simulator uses real patient images, and is able to provide simulation for 50 cases, with a haptic interface that uses a standard TRUS probe and biopsy needle. Intrinsic reliability was successfully demonstrated by comparing results from the left and right sides of the prostate. Face and content validity respondents noted the realism of the simulator, and its appropriateness as a teaching model. The simulator was able to distinguish between experts and novices during construct validity testing. CONCLUSIONS: A virtual reality TRUS simulator has successfully been created. It has promising face, content and construct validity results.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".