MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560894905 · doi:10.7759/cureus.950

Three-Dimensional Printing of a Hemorrhagic Cervical Cancer Model for Postgraduate Gynecological Training

2017· article· en· W2560894905 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTrainerCervixCervical cancerSession (web analytics)Obstetrics and gynaecologyMedical physicsCancerInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: A realistic hemorrhagic cervical cancer model was three-dimensionally (3D) printed and used in a postgraduate medical simulation training session. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Computer-assisted design (CAD) software was the platform of choice to create and refine the cervical model. Once the prototype was finalized, another software allowed for the addition of a neoplastic mass, which included openings for bleeding from the neoplasm and cervical os. 3D printing was done using two desktop printers and three different materials. An emergency medicine simulation case was presented to obstetrics and gynecology residents who were at varying stages of their training. The scenario included history taking and physical examination of a standardized patient. This was a hybrid simulation; a synthetic pelvic task trainer that allowed the placement of the cervical model was connected to the standardized patient. The task trainer was placed under a drape and appeared to extend from the standardized patient's body. At various points in the simulation, the standardized patient controlled the cervical bleeding through a peripheral venous line. Feedback forms were completed, and the models were discussed and evaluated with staff. RESULTS: A final cervical model was created and successfully printed. Overall, the models were reported to be similar to a real cervix. The models bled well. Most models were not sutured during the scenarios, but overall, the value of the printed cervical models was reported to be high. DISCUSSION: The models were well received, but it was suggested that more colors be integrated into the cervix in order to better emphasize the intended pathology. The model design requires further improvement, such as the addition of a locking mechanism, in order to ensure that the cervix stays inside the task trainer throughout the simulation. Adjustments to the simulated blood product would allow the bleeding to flow more vigorously. Additionally, a different simulation scenario might be more suitable to explore the residents' ability to suture the cervical models, as cervical suturing of a neoplasm is not a common emergency department procedure. CONCLUSION: 3D-printed cervical models are an economical and anatomically accurate option for simulation training and other educational purposes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.235 · 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