Development and Validation of a Model for Training Equine Phlebotomy and Intramuscular Injection Skills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simulation in veterinary education offers a solution for bridging the gap between observation and performance of clinical skills. An equine neck model was created that allows repetitive practice of jugular phlebotomy, intramuscular (IM) injection, and intravenous catheterization. The aim of this study was to validate the model for jugular phlebotomy and IM injection. We surveyed experienced veterinarians on the model's realism and the comprehensiveness of its features. In a randomized experimental study, we compared the learning outcomes of first-year veterinary students trained on the model (n=48) and students trained on equine head-neck cadavers (n=45). There was no difference in post-training performance of phlebotomy on the live horse between cadaver-trained students and model-trained students when assessed by a checklist (cadaver 6.87±0.33; model 6.89±0.77; p=.99) or a global rating scale (cadaver 5.23±0.87; model 5.32±0.77; p=.78). No difference was found between post-training scores for IM injection when assessed by checklist (cadaver 6.87±0.34; model 6.89±0.31; p=.76) or global rating scale (cadaver 5.23±0.87; model 5.32±0.77; p=.75). Veterinarians (n=7) found this low-fidelity model acceptable and supported its use as a training tool for veterinary students. Students reported in a post-lab survey that they felt models were as helpful as cadavers for learning the procedures. These results support the use of the model as a component of first-year veterinary student curriculum.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".