MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128738313 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2010.2050886

Evaluation of Model-Enhanced Ultrasound-Assisted Interventional Guidance in a Cardiac Phantom

2010· article· en· W2128738313 on OpenAlexafffund
Cristian A. Linte, John Moore, Chris Wedlake, Terry M. Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsImaging phantomVisualizationUltrasoundMedical physicsComputer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceRadiologyMedicineBiomedical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minimizing invasiveness associated with cardiac procedures has led to limited visual access to the target tissues. To address these limitations, we have developed a visualization environment that integrates interventional ultrasound (US) imaging with preoperative anatomical models and virtual representations of the surgical instruments tracked in real time. In this paper, we present a comprehensive evaluation of our model-enhanced US-guidance environment by simulating clinically relevant interventions in vitro . We have demonstrated that model-enhanced US guidance provides a clinically desired targeting accuracy better than 3-mm rms and maintains this level of accuracy even in the case of image-to-patient misalignments that are often encountered in the clinic. These studies emphasize the benefits of integrating real-time imaging with preoperative data to enhance surgical navigation in the absence of direct vision during minimally invasive cardiac interventions.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207