Construct Validation of a Printed Bone Substitute in Otologic Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
: Patient safety demands enhancements in training. Graduated cadaveric bone exposure is fundamental to otologic training. Printed bone models (PBM) provide a low-cost, anatomically consistent adjunct to cadaveric materials in trainee skill acquisition.The purpose of this study is to determine if resident training level can be distinguished on the basis of performance employing a printed temporal bone model, graded by a previous validated scale. METHODS: Nineteen residents (11 male, 8 female) from 9 graduate programs, attending a National Otolaryngology Conference, completed a mastoidectomy with posterior tympanotomy on identic 3D PBMs and a Likert scale (1-7) survey on subjective appreciation of the simulation. Four experts graded participant performance using the previously validated Welling Scale. RESULTS: ANOVA revealed significant performance differences between the junior/intermediate and junior/senior PGY cohorts. No difference was observed between intermediate/senior cohorts on the basis of PGY or subjective temporal bone dissection experience. Clustering aspects of the scale with specific focus on thinning tasks found a similar outcome to the composite scale scores.Subjective experience judged printed bone to be similar to cadaveric in drill-bone interaction. Participants believed the simulation would improve surgical performance, comfort with actual patients, and operative speed. CONCLUSION: Subjectively, printed bone compared favorably to cadaveric.The simulation demonstrated construct validity but was challenged in differentiating senior from intermediate trainee performance. This may be a function of the PBM inherent character, limitations in grading instrument fidelity or sample size. It is also possible that the dominant period of skill acquisition for mastoidectomy and posterior tympanotomy are primarily acquired during the junior training.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".