MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2580764955 · doi:10.18192/uojm.v7i1.1552

3D Printing for 21st Century Medical Learners: Opportunities for Innovative Research and Collaboration

2017· article· en· W2580764955 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Aili Wang, Talia Chung, Hanan Anis, Alireza Jalali

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommercializationLibrary sciencePolitical scienceHumanitiesArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractWith the commercialization of accessible 3D printers, using 3D printing for creation of personalized medical interventions has become a rapidly expanding area of research. In keeping with these developments, the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Ottawa has purchased 3D printers (Makerbot Replicator 2X and Ultimaker 2 Extended +) and launched a collaboration with Makerspace and the Health Sciences Library to investigate local opportunities to incorporate 3D printing into education, simulations and research. This article aims to summarize some of the recent developments in 3D printing and introduce readers to how one could use 3D printing for personalized medicine. RésuméAvec la venue de la commercialisation d’imprimantes 3D accessibles, l’emploi de l’impression 3D pour la création d’interventions médicales personnalisées est un domaine de recherche en développement rapide. Afin de rester à jour avec ces développements, la Faculté de Médecine de l’Université d’Ottawa s’est procuré des imprimantes 3D (Makerbot Replicator 2X et Ultimaker 2 Extended +) et a entamé une collaboration avec Makerspace et la Bibliothèque des Sciences de la Santé, pour examiner des opportunités locales visant à incorporer l’impression 3D à l’éducation, aux simulations et à la recherche. Cet article vise à résumer certains des développe- ments récents en impression 3D et à présenter aux lecteurs la manière dont celle-ci peut être utilisée pour la médecine personnalisée.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of MedicineSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207