MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004242787 · doi:10.1109/icra.2013.6631196

The application of force sensing to skills assessment in Minimally Invasive Surgery

2013· article· en· W2004242787 on OpenAlexaff
Ana Luisa Trejos, Rajni V. Patel, Michael D. Naish, Richard Malthaner, Christopher M. Schlachta

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research Institute
FundersImperial College London
KeywordsHaptic technologyComputer scienceInvasive surgerySet (abstract data type)Work (physics)SimulationMeasure (data warehouse)Human–computer interactionMedical physicsEngineeringSurgeryMedicineData miningMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reduced access conditions present in Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) affect the feel of interaction forces between the instruments and the tissue being treated. This loss of haptic information compromises the safety of the procedure and must be overcome through training. Determining the skill level of trainees is critical for ensuring patient safety. The objective of this work was to evaluate the usefulness of force information for skills assessment during MIS. Experiments were performed using a set of sensorized instruments capable of measuring instrument position and tissue interaction forces. The results show that experience level has a strong correlation with force-based metrics. The proposed metrics can be automatically computed, are completely objective, and measure important aspects of performance.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207