MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2404448311

Three-dimensional biomodeling in complex mandibular reconstruction and surgical simulation: prospective trial.

2011· article· en· W2404448311 on OpenAlexaff
Peter T. Dziegielewski, King B, Andrew Grosvenor, Walter Dobrovolsky, Khalid Ansari, Khalid Al‐Qahtani, Harris, Hadi Seikaly

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityMedicineOrthodonticsProspective cohort studySurgeryDentistryComputer scienceHuman–computer interaction
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mandibular reconstruction is challenging for experienced and resident surgeons. Three-dimensional (3D) biomodeling creates accurate physical models of patients' craniofacial skeletons, which can potentially assist reconstruction. However, this capacity has not been objectively examined. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess 3D biomodels in performing and learning mandibular reconstruction through surgical simulation. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary care academic referral centre. METHODS: Ten experienced and 10 naive resident surgeons were asked to bend and fixate a titanium reconstruction plate, for a standardized anterior hemimandibular defect, on a 3D biomodel by freehand or 3D biomodel-assisted means. Participants were randomized to which technique was performed first. Twenty-four to 48 hours later, participants performed the opposite technique. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Accuracy was measured by anterior mental projection and intercondylar and interangular splay. The results per technique were compared to a complete (control) mandible. The time of reconstruction and usability of each technique, as per an International Standards Organization-based questionnaire, were also determined. RESULTS: Three-dimensional biomodel-assisted reconstruction led to plates with statistically indifferent projection and splay compared to the control (p < .05) for both groups. Conversely, freehand constructs significantly deviated in projection and splay for either group (p < .05). No difference in reconstruction time by technique was found (p < .05). Usability favoured 3D biomodel-assisted bending, with significantly higher ratings in either group (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional biomodels provide a usable and accurate means of mandibular reconstruction for experienced surgeons. Moreover, when used in surgical simulation, they provide an effective tool for teaching residents.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations21
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207