MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900950114 · doi:10.1002/uog.16297

OP15.04: Simulator‐based obstetric ultrasound training: a prospective randomised single‐blinded study

2016· article· en· W2900950114 on OpenAlexaff
Stefania Ronzoni, Hadar Rosen, Y. Lee, Lara Gotha, Sev Perelman, Rory Windrim

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUltrasoundTest (biology)Prospective cohort studyBlinded studyConfidence intervalPhysical therapyNuclear medicineSurgeryRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compare the use of simulator-based to patient-based obstetric ultrasound training. Prospective, randomised, single-blinded trial.18 trainees with minimal ultrasound exposure were recruited. Mid-trimester fetal brain anatomy in the standard planes: (BPD and HC, CSP, posterior fossa, and lateral ventricles) was chosen as a surrogate for all fetal anatomy ultrasound training. Trainees were randomised into 2 groups according to training method: Simulator group (“SIM”,n = 9) or Patient Group (“PT”,n = 9). The study design was as follows: a didactic session of the required planes, followed by ‘real’ patient 15 minute pre-test. 45 minute training session with dedicated ultrasound educator, using either Simulator or ‘real’ Patient. 15 minutes post-test: to obtain and label the standard 4 planes on a ‘real’ patient. All images were stored and then scored by 2 blinded MFM staff, according to 3 set criteria: image quality, landmarks and measurements. Each criterion was scored 0–15 for a total score of 0–60. Pre-test competence was similar between the groups. All trainees improved significantly (mean score pre-test 14.6 vs post-test 26.6, p < 0.05). For both groups a significant score improvement following training was found: PT (mean score pre-test 13.3 vs. post-test 24.6 p < 0.04) and SIM (mean score pre-test 15.9 vs. post-test 28.9 p < 0.05). Trainees were further divided by initial level of confidence (pretest score ≤5: very unconfident (VU); pretest >5: unconfident (U)). Improvement was similar for both groups but VU performance improved more in the SIM (mean pre vs. post test score 3.5 to 35) compared to PT (mean pre vs. post test score 2.3 to 25.6). Basic simulator based obstetric ultrasound training preformed as well as real patient training, and was found especially beneficial for beginner trainees. It may provide a solution in the form of a protected, accessible tool to help overcome the challenges of residency ultrasound training as well as improve patient care.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.326
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207