MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044963363 · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e3182197016

Deliberate Practice on a Virtual Reality Laparoscopic Simulator Enhances the Quality of Surgical Technical Skills

2011· article· en· W2044963363 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

VenueAnnals of Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVirtual realitySimulationCadaveric spasmLaparoscopic cholecystectomyRating scalePhysical therapySession (web analytics)Medical physicsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryHuman–computer interactionComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Virtual reality (VR) simulation provides unique training opportunities. This study evaluates whether the deliberate practice (DP) can be successfully applied to simulated laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for enhancement of the quality of surgical skills. METHODS: Twenty-six inexperienced surgeons underwent a training program for LC on a VR simulator. Trainees were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 specific protocols of 10 sessions comprising a total of 20 LCs. For each session, the control group performed 2 LCs separated by 30 minutes of occupational activities; the DP group were assigned 30 minutes of DP activities in between 2 LCs. Each participant then performed 2 LCs on a cadaveric porcine model. Quantitative parameters were recorded from the simulator and a motion tracking device; qualitative assessment utilized validated rating scales. RESULTS: Twenty-two subjects completed training. Learning curves on the VR simulator were significant for time taken and number of movements in both groups. The DP group was slower from the third LC (1373 vs. 872 seconds, P = 0.022) and utilized more movements from the seventh (942 vs. 701, P = 0.033). Global rating scores improved significantly in both groups over repeated LCs. The DP group revealed higher scores than control from tenth (19.5 vs. 14, P = 0.014) until the twentieth LC (22 vs. 16, P = 0.003). On the porcine model, the DP group also achieved higher global rating scores (25.5 vs. 19.5, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: VR training improved dexterity for both groups, and led to transfer of skill onto a porcine LC model. The DP group achieved higher quality, and demonstrated superior transfer onto real tissues.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.350
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.103 · 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