Long-term Retention of a 3-Dimensional Educational Computer Model of the Larynx
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the long-term retention of a 3-dimentional (3-D) educational computer model of the larynx to teach laryngeal anatomy and to compare it with standard written instruction (SWI). DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled trial. SETTING: University education program. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred health care students. INTERVENTIONS: For short-term assessment, 50 students were randomized to the 3-D model and 50 to SWI and were tested using a 20-question laryngeal test. Six months later, the same students were invited to retake the laryngeal anatomy test to examine long-term retention. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The score on a 20-item Web-based test that assessed the students' level of knowledge of laryngeal anatomy approximately 6 months after their initial exposure to the laryngeal anatomy teaching intervention. RESULTS: Sixty-two students retook the test: 3-D (n = 30) and SWI (n = 32). No significant difference was noted in mean scores (P = .54) and change in scores (P = .59) between short- and long-term retention on the laryngeal anatomy test. There was a trend toward an increase in 3-D scores in both groups (P = .07) and a significant increase in 3-D scores in the 3-D group only (P = .049). CONCLUSIONS: A low-fidelity model (SWI) is just as effective as a high-fidelity model (3-D) in teaching laryngeal anatomy. The acquired knowledge from either educational intervention may last up to 6 months for long-term retention. This study is one of the few in medical education to examine long-term retention.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it