A Vibro-Tactile Display for Clinical Monitoring
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
BACKGROUND: Vibro-tactile displays use human skin to convey information from physiological monitors to anesthesiologists, providing cues about changes in the status of the patient. In this investigation, we evaluated, in a real-time clinical environment, the usability and wearability of a novel vibro-tactile display belt recently developed by our group, and determined its accuracy in identifying events when used by anesthesiologists. METHODS: A prospective observational study design was used. During routine anesthesia, a standard physiological monitor was connected to a software tool that used algorithms to automatically identify changing trends in mean noninvasive arterial blood pressure, expired minute ventilation, peak airway pressure, and end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure. The software was wirelessly interfaced to a vibro-tactile belt worn by the anesthesiologist. Each physiological variable was mapped to 1 of 4 tactor locations within the belt. The direction (increase/decrease) and 2 levels of change (small/large) were encoded in the stimulation patterns. A training session was completed by each anesthesiologist. The system was activated in real-time during anesthesia alongside routine physiological monitors. When the algorithms detected changes in the patient, the belt vibrated at the appropriate location with the pattern corresponding to the level and direction of change. Using a touch screen monitor the anesthesiologist was to enter the vibro-tactile message by first identifying the variable, then identifying the level and direction of change. Usability and wearability questionnaires were to be completed. The percentage of correct identification of the physiological trend, the direction of change, and the level of change were primary outcome variables. The mean usability score and wearability results were secondary outcome variables. We hypothesized that anesthesiologists would correctly identify the events communicated to them through the vibro-tactile belt 90% of the time, and that anesthesiologists would find the vibro-tactile belt usable and wearable. RESULTS: Seventeen anesthesiologists evaluated the display during 57 cases. The belt was operational for a mean (SD) duration of 75 (41) minutes per case. Seven cases were excluded from analysis because of technical failures. Eighty-one percent (confidence interval [CI], 77% to 84%) of all stimuli were decoded. The physiological trend, the direction of change, and the level of change were correctly identified for 97.7% (CI 96%-99%), 94.9% (CI 92%-97%), and 93.5% of these stimuli (CI, 91%-96%), respectively. Fourteen anesthesiologists completed the usability and wearability questionnaires. The mean usability score was 4.8 of a maximum usability score of 7. CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesiologists found a vibro-tactile belt to be wearable and usable and could accurately decode vibro-tactile messages in a real-time clinical environment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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