MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086321319 · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318207a789

Mental Practice Enhances Surgical Technical Skills

2011· article· en· W2086321319 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 institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuality (philosophy)Randomized controlled trialMental healthMedical educationPsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of mental practice on surgical performance. BACKGROUND: Increasing concerns for patient safety have highlighted a need for alternative training strategies outside the operating room. Mental practice (MP), "the cognitive rehearsal of a task before performance," has been successful in sport and music to enhance skill. This study investigates whether MP enhances performance in laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: After baseline skills testing, 20 novice surgeons underwent training on an evidence-based virtual reality curriculum. After randomization using the closed envelope technique, all participants performed 5 Virtual Reality (VR) laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LC). Mental practice participants performed 30 minutes of MP before each LC; control participants viewed an online lecture. Technical performance was assessed using video Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills-based global ratings scale (scored from 7 to 35). Mental imagery was assessed using a previously validated Mental Imagery Questionnaire. RESULTS: Eighteen participants completed the study. There were no intergroup differences in baseline technical ability. Learning curves were demonstrated for both MP and control groups. Mental practice was superior to control (global ratings) for the first LC (median 20 vs 15, P = 0.005), second LC (20.5 vs 13.5, P = 0.001), third LC (24 vs 15.5, P < 0.001), fourth LC (25.5 vs 15.5, P < 0.001) and the fifth LC (27.5 vs 19.5, P = 0.00). The imagery for the MP group was also significantly superior to the control group across all sessions (P < 0.05). Improved imagery significantly correlated with better quality of performance (ρ 0.51–0.62, Ps < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first randomized controlled study to show that MP enhances the quality of performance based on VR laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This may be a time- and cost-effective strategy to augment traditional training in the OR thus potentially improving patient care.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.290
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.127 · 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