MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765515122 · doi:10.1017/s002221511700216x

Evaluation of a low-fidelity ear surgery simulator in a low-resource setting

2017· article· en· W2765515122 on OpenAlexaff
Kimberly Luu, Lynne Straatman, Doreen Nakku, Brian D. Westerberg, N Carter, Matthew Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Laryngology & Otology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrainerConstruct validityCeiling (cloud)FidelityComputer scienceFace validityConstruct (python library)Resource (disambiguation)MedicineSimulationApplied psychologyPsychologySurgeryEngineeringPsychometricsPatient satisfaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The provision of healthcare education in developing countries is a complex problem that simulation has the potential to help. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a low-cost ear surgery simulator, the Ear Trainer. METHODS: The Ear Trainer was assessed in two low-resource environments in Cambodia and Uganda. Participants were video-recorded performing four specific middle-ear procedures, and blindly scored using a validated measurement tool. Face validity, construct validity and objective learning were assessed. RESULTS: The Ear Trainer provides a realistic representation of the ear. Construct validity assessment confirmed that experts performed better than novices. Participants displayed improvement in all tasks except foreign body removal, likely because of a ceiling effect. CONCLUSION: This study validates the Ear Trainer as a useful training tool for otological microsurgical skills in developing world settings.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Laryngology & OtologySame topicEar Surgery and Otitis MediaFrench-language works237,207