MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011984537 · doi:10.3109/17453674.2014.917502

Virtual-reality simulation to assess performance in hip fracture surgery

2014· article· en· W2011984537 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

VenueActa Orthopaedica · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVirtual realityHip fractureOrthopedic surgeryPhysical therapySurgeryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationOsteoporosisHuman–computer interactionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Internal fixation of hip fractures is a common and important procedure that orthopedic surgeons must master early in their career. Virtual-reality training could improve initial skills, and a simulation-based test would make it possible to ensure basic competency of junior surgeons before they proceed to supervised practice on patients. The aim of this study was to develop a reliable and valid test with credible pass/fail standards. METHODS: 20 physicians (10 untrained novices and 10 experienced orthopedic surgeons) each performed 3 internal fixation procedures of an undisplaced femoral neck fracture: 2 hook-pins, 2 screws, and a sliding hip screw. All procedures were preformed on a trauma simulator. Performance scores for each procedure were obtained from the predefined metrics of the simulator. The inter-case reliability of the simulator metrics was explored by calculation of intra-class correlation coefficient. Validity was explored by comparison between novices' and experts' scores using independent-samples t-test. A pass/fail standard was set by the contrasting-groups method and the consequences were explored. RESULTS: The percentage of maximum combined score (PM score) showed an inter-case reliability of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.65-0.93) between the 3 procedures. The mean PM score was 30% (CI: 7-53) for the novices and 76% (CI: 68-83) for the experienced surgeons. The pass/fail standard was set at 58%, resulting in none of the novices passing the test and a single experienced surgeon failing the test. INTERPRETATION: The simulation-based test was reliable and valid in our setting, and the pass/fail standard could discriminate between novices and experienced surgeons. Potentially, training and testing of future junior surgeons on a virtual-reality simulator could ensure basic competency before proceeding to supervised practice on patients.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.269 · 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