MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974089311 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.18.01197

Artificial Intelligence Distinguishes Surgical Training Levels in a Virtual Reality Spinal Task

2019· article· en· W2974089311 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal General HospitalMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityArtificial intelligenceMachine learningComputer scienceSupport vector machineTask (project management)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: With the emergence of competency-based training, the current evaluation scheme of surgical skills is evolving to include newer methods of assessment and training. Artificial intelligence through machine learning algorithms can utilize extensive data sets to analyze operator performance. This study aimed to address 3 questions: (1) Can artificial intelligence uncover novel metrics of surgical performance? (2) Can support vector machine algorithms be trained to differentiate "senior" and "junior" participants who are executing a virtual reality hemilaminectomy? (3) Can other algorithms achieve a good classification performance? METHODS: Participants from 4 Canadian universities were divided into 2 groups according to their training level (senior and junior) and were asked to perform a virtual reality hemilaminectomy. The position, angle, and force application of the simulated burr and suction instruments, along with tissue volumes that were removed, were recorded at 20-ms intervals. Raw data were manipulated to create metrics to train machine learning algorithms. Five algorithms, including a support vector machine, were trained to predict whether the task was performed by a senior or junior participant. The accuracy of each algorithm was assessed through leave-one-out cross-validation. RESULTS: Forty-one individuals were enrolled (22 senior and 19 junior participants). Twelve metrics related to safety of the procedure, efficiency, motion of the tools, and coordination were selected. Following cross-validation, the support vector machine achieved a 97.6% accuracy. The other algorithms achieved accuracy of 92.7%, 87.8%, 70.7%, and 65.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial intelligence defined novel metrics of surgical performance and outlined training levels in a virtual reality spinal simulation procedure. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The significance of these results lies in the potential of artificial intelligence to complement current educational paradigms and better prepare residents for surgical procedures.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.173 · 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