MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795710321 · doi:10.1145/3170427.3174361

Leveraging Augmented Reality Training Tool for Medical Education

2018· article· en· W2795710321 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Wijdenes, David Borkenhagen, Julie Babione, Irene Ma, Greg Hallihan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersDivision of Graduate Education
KeywordsUsabilityAugmented realityComputer sciencePatient safetyCompetence (human resources)Human–computer interactionHealth careMultimediaMedical educationMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Central venous catheterization is a relatively common bedside medical procedure that involves the placement of a catheter into a patient»s internal jugular vein in order to administer medication or fluids. To learn this technique, medical students traditionally practice on training mannequins under the guidance of a clinical instructor. The objective of this project was to co-develop a standardized augmented reality solution for teaching medical students this procedure, which would enable them to practice independently and at their own pace. Following an iterative design and prototyping process, we compiled a comprehensive set of usability heuristics specific to augmented reality healthcare applications, used to identify unique usability issues associated with augmented reality software. This approach offers a better strategy to improve the usability of augmented reality system and increases the potential to standardize and render medical education more accessible. The benefits of applying augmented reality to simulated medical education come with heavy consequences in the event of poor learning outcomes. The usability of these systems is paramount to ensure the development of clinical competence is facilitated and not hindered.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207