MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998754069 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.19.00982

Improved Complex Skill Acquisition by Immersive Virtual Reality Training

2020· article· en· W2998754069 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsHand and Upper Limb ClinicWestern UniversityUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityDreyfus model of skill acquisitionMedicineRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapyTask (project management)SurgeryComputer scienceHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There has been limited literature on immersive virtual reality (VR) simulation in orthopaedic education. The purpose of this multicenter, blinded, randomized controlled trial was to determine the validity and efficacy of immersive VR training in orthopaedic resident education. METHODS: Nineteen senior orthopaedic residents (resident group) and 7 consultant shoulder arthroplasty surgeons (expert group) participated in the trial comparing immersive VR with traditional learning using a technical journal article as a control. The examined task focused on achieving optimal glenoid exposure. Participants completed demographic questionnaires, knowledge tests, and a glenoid exposure on fresh-frozen cadavers while being examined by blinded shoulder arthroplasty surgeons. Training superiority was determined by the outcome measures of the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) score, a developed laboratory metric, verbal answers, and time to task completion. RESULTS: Immersive VR had greater realism and was superior in teaching glenoid exposure than the control (p = 0.01). The expert group outperformed the resident group on knowledge testing (p = 0.04). The immersive VR group completed the learning activity and knowledge tests significantly faster (p < 0.001) at a mean time (and standard deviation) of 11 ± 3 minutes than the control group at 20 ± 4 minutes, performing 3 to 5 VR repeats for a reduction in learning time of 570%. The immersive VR group completed the glenoid exposure significantly faster (p = 0.04) at a mean time of 14 ± 7 minutes than the control group at 21 ± 6 minutes, with superior OSATS instrument handling scores (p = 0.03). The immersive VR group scored equivalently in surprise verbal scores (p = 0.85) and written knowledge scores (p = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Immersive VR demonstrated substantially improved translational technical and nontechnical skills acquisition over traditional learning in senior orthopaedic residents. Additionally, the results demonstrate the face, content, construct, and transfer validity for immersive VR. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This adequately powered, randomized controlled trial demonstrated how an immersive VR system can efficiently (570%) teach a complex surgical procedure and also demonstrate improved translational skill and knowledge acquisition when compared with a traditional learning method.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.198 · 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