MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974410696 · doi:10.1177/2292550319876660

High-Fidelity Microsurgical Simulation: The Thiel Cadaveric Nerve Model and Evaluation Instrument

2019· article· en· W2974410696 on OpenAlexaff
Andrei Odobescu, Deborah V. Dawson, Isak Goodwin, Patrick G. Harris, Joseph Bou‐Merhi, Michel Alain Danino

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInter-rater reliabilityIntraclass correlationPsychologyCronbach's alphaCadaveric spasmHumanitiesMedicineNuclear medicineArtSurgeryPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With surgical education moving from a time-based to a competency-based model, developing high-fidelity simulation models has become a priority. The Thiel cadaveric model has previously been used for a number of medical and surgical simulations, including microvascular simulation. We aim to investigate the use of the Thiel model in peripheral nerve simulation and validate a novel evaluation instrument. Sixteen residents ranging from postgraduate years 1 to 6 participated in the study. Their nerve coaptations using Thiel cadaveric nerves were video recorded and evaluated by 5 fellowship-trained microsurgeons using the Micro-Neurorrhaphy Evaluation Scale (MNES). The intraclass correlation among the 5 evaluators was 0.75, revealing excellent interrater reliability. The Cronbach α was .77, underlining the internal consistency of the test items. Bivariate analysis revealed a significant association between the MNES scores and the participants' self-declared level of experience. This correlation was confirmed by mixed modeling. Our results validate the MNES and underscore the utility of the Thiel nerve tissue for peripheral nerve surgical simulation.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlastic SurgerySame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207