Retention of Skills After Simulation-based Training in Orthopaedic Surgery
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
Simulation-based surgical skills training has become essential in orthopaedic practice because of concerns about patient safety and an increase in technically challenging procedures. Surgical skills training in specifically designed simulation laboratories allows practice of procedures in a risk-free environment before they are performed in the operating room. The transferability of acquired skills to performance with patients is the most effective measure of the predictive validity of simulation-based training. Retention of the skills transferred to clinical situations is also critical. However, evidence of simulation-based skill retention in the orthopaedic literature is limited, and concerns about sustainability exist. Solutions for skill decay include repeated practice of the tasks learned on simulators and reinforcement of areas that are sensitive to decline. Further research is required to determine the retention rates of surgical skills acquired in simulation-based training as well as the success of proposed solutions for skill decay.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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