MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288178512 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.n.00058

Improving Residency Training in Arthroscopic Knee Surgery with Use of a Virtual-Reality Simulator

2014· article· en· W2288178512 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

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChecklistRating scaleArthroscopyPhysical therapyMedicineKnee arthroscopyVirtual realityOrthopedic surgeryMedical physicsSimulationSurgeryPsychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of articles in the surgical literature demonstrating transfer validity (transfer of training). The purpose of this study was to assess whether skills learned on the ArthroSim virtual-reality arthroscopic knee simulator transferred to greater skill levels in the operating room. METHODS: Postgraduate year-3 orthopaedic residents were randomized into simulator-trained and control groups at seven academic institutions. The experimental group trained on the simulator, performing a knee diagnostic arthroscopy procedure to a predetermined proficiency level based on the average proficiency of five community-based orthopaedic surgeons performing the same procedure on the simulator. The residents in the control group continued their institution-specific orthopaedic education and training. Both groups then performed a diagnostic knee arthroscopy procedure on a live patient. Video recordings of the arthroscopic surgery were analyzed by five pairs of expert arthroscopic surgeons blinded to the identity of the residents. A proprietary global rating scale and a procedural checklist, which included visualization and probing scales, were used for rating. RESULTS: Forty-eight (89%) of the fifty-four postgraduate year-3 residents from seven academic institutions completed the study. The simulator-trained group averaged eleven hours of training on the simulator to reach proficiency. The simulator-trained group performed significantly better when rated according to our procedural checklist (p = 0.031), including probing skills (p = 0.016) but not visualization skills (p = 0.34), compared with the control group. The procedural checklist weighted probing skills double the weight of visualization skills. The global rating scale failed to reach significance (p = 0.061) because of one extreme outlier. The duration of the procedure was not significant. This lack of a significant difference seemed to be related to the fact that residents in the control group were less thorough, which shortened their time to completion of the arthroscopic procedure. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated transfer validity (transfer of training) that residents trained to proficiency on a high-fidelity realistic virtual-reality arthroscopic knee simulator showed a greater skill level in the operating room compared with the control group. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We believe that the results of our study will stimulate residency program directors to incorporate surgical simulation into the core curriculum of their residency programs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.198 · 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