MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005683770 · doi:10.1002/aet2.10439

Differences in Gaze Fixation Location and Duration Between Resident and Fellowship Sonographers Interpreting a Focused Assessment With Sonography in Trauma

2020· article· en· W3005683770 on OpenAlexaff
Colin Bell, Adam Szulewski, Melanie Walker, Conor McKaigney, Graeme Ross, Louise Rang, Joseph Newbigging, John Kendall

Bibliographic record

VenueAEM Education and Training · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiology practices and education
Canadian institutionsSouth Health CampusUniversity of CalgaryKingston Health Sciences CentreAlberta Health ServicesQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGazeMedicineFixation (population genetics)Wilcoxon signed-rank testEye trackingNuclear medicinePsychologyArtificial intelligencePopulationMann–Whitney U testInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We quantified the gaze fixation duration of resident and fellowship sonographers interpreting a prerecorded focused assessment with sonography in trauma (FAST). We hypothesized that all sonographers would fixate on each relevant anatomic relationship but that the duration of fixation would differ. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study collecting and analyzing the gaze fixations of a convenience sample of current resident and fellowship sonographers. All sonographers viewed a standardized FAST video, and their gaze fixations were recorded using a Tobii X3-120 eye-tracking bar. Gaze fixations over nine anatomic regions of interest (ROIs) were identified. These were assessed for normality and analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test at an alpha of 0.05 and Bonferroni correction p value of <0.0034. The chi-square test and Pearson's correlation were performed to assess statistical association. RESULTS: The gaze fixation recordings of 24 resident and eight fellowship sonographers were suitable for analysis. Fourteen of the 24 resident sonographers viewed all ROIs in the FAST, whereas all eight fellowship sonographers viewed each of the nine relevant ROIs. Five ROIs were identified over which at least one resident sonographer did not have a gaze fixation. No statistically significant difference was identified between groups. Resident sonographers gaze fixated over the left upper quadrant (LUQ) splenorenal interface for a median (interquartile range) of 10.64 (9.73-11.60) seconds. The fellowship group viewed the same ROI for 8.43 (6.64-8.95) seconds (p < 0.003). All participants viewed this ROI. No other ROIs had a statistical difference. CONCLUSION: Five ROIs were identified that were not visually interrogated by all resident sonographers. Only 14 of 24 resident sonographers visually interrogated every area in the FAST, whereas all fellowship sonographers interrogated every ROI. A statistically significant difference was found in gaze fixation duration between resident and fellowship sonographers in one ROI. Further study is required for gaze fixation assessment to become a tool for the interpretation component of point-of-care ultrasound.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAEM Education and TrainingSame topicRadiology practices and educationFrench-language works237,207