Novel Hands-Free Pointer Improves Instruction Efficiency in Laparoscopic Surgery
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
To improve instruction efficiency during advanced laparoscopic surgery, a hands-free, head-controlled, multimonitor pointer was developed. One instructor guided 20 trainees to locate critical points on a simulated laparoscopic cholecystectomy model. Twenty points, visible to the instructor only, were selected on a photo of a partially dissected gallbladder placed within a laparoscopic trainer box. For each trainee, the points were randomized to 2 groups of 10 points with the instructor providing verbal guidance only or guidance assisted by the head-controlled pointer that appeared on both the instructor's and trainees' monitors. The primary outcome was the time to locate 10 points. Total time was shorter with the pointer than with verbal guidance alone (65 +/- 14 vs 119 +/- 34 seconds, P < .001). The average of mean individual times to locate each point was shorter with the pointer than without (5.4 +/- 0.5 vs 11.9 +/- 2.4 seconds, P < .001). The instructor's efficiency improved over time with both verbal guidance (P = .007) and with the pointer (P = .001). The benefit of pointer instruction was greater in trainees with laparoscopic experience compared with those without experience (P = .006). Use of a hands-free pointer improved instruction efficiency in simulated laparoscopy. Experienced surgeons benefited the most.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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