Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This report describes the production of a low-cost ultrasound phantom of the lumbosacral spine. The phantom should be a very useful tool to teach the basic skills for ultrasound-guided procedures of the lumbosacral spine. METHODS: A lumbosacral spine model is secured to the bottom of a microwave-safe container and is immersed in a concentrated gelatin solution. After the gelatin hardens, the model can be used for scanning practice as well as needle placement. The phantom can be recovered after use by melting the gelatin in a microwave to "erase" any needle track marks. RESULTS: A transparent and durable gelatin block is produced. This allows trainees to have direct visual access to the lumbosacral spine model to correlate with the ultrasound images as well as to confirm proper needle placement. Disadvantages of the model include lack of simulated soft tissue structures and an absence of simulated haptic feedback during needle placement. Metamucil can be added to the gelatin to simulate the appearance of soft tissue, although this increases the opacity and thus decreases the visual access of the gelatin. CONCLUSIONS: This teaching tool can provide trainees with an opportunity to familiarize themselves with sonoanatomy of the lumbosacral spine in addition to practicing probe handling techniques and needle placement.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".