MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2425993834 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2016.118

P.012 Spinal durotomy repair simulator for deliberate microsurgical practice: integration into a residency training module

2016· article· en· W2425993834 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
JC Lau, L Denning, SP Lownie, T H Peters, Elvis C. S. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMicrosurgeryNeurovascular bundleLumbarMedical physicsLumbar spineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Deliberate practice is one aspect of gaining competency in surgical skills. We have previously integrated a vascular microsurgery module into our residency training curriculum, and have recently described our experience with constructing patient-specific spine models for simulating lumbar spinal durotomy repair. The goal of this project is to develop the necessary infrastructure to facilitate practice on the spine model during residency. Methods: A 3D-printed plastic lumbar spine model was created from a patient computed tomography scan. L2 was manually laminectomized, and paraspinal tissues were simulated using Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) Plastisol. Harvested bovine pericardium was sewn into tubular form as a dural substitute. The pericardial tubes were tied at either end and attached to intravenous tubing to create a closed loop water system. Results: We are developing a video tutorial describing how to setup and use the model. Residents will be recorded while performing a 1.5 cm durotomy and repair using a surgical microscope available in our training laboratory (Drake-Hunterian Neurovascular Laboratory, London, Ontario, Canada). Residents are asked to grade the realism of the model using a questionnaire. Metrics of quality are to be determined. Conclusions: Our proposed model is a cost-effective, easy-to-prepare lumbar spinal simulator that facilitates microsurgical practice during neurosurgical residency.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.004

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicSurgical Simulation and Training→French-language works237,207→