MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022471192 · doi:10.1159/000464385

Virtual Reality Surgical Simulation: Implications for Resection of Intracranial Gliomas

2017· review· en· W3022471192 on OpenAlexaff
Ayoub Dakson, Murray Hong, David B. Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in neurological surgery · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realitySurgical simulationHaptic technologySet (abstract data type)Context (archaeology)Computer scienceSurgical planningSimulation trainingSurgical proceduresMedical physicsHuman–computer interactionMedicineSimulationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surgical simulation has the potential to play important roles in surgical training and preoperative planning. The advent of virtual reality (VR) with tactile haptic feedback has revolutionized surgical simulation, creating a novel environment for residents to learn manual skills without compromising patient safety. This concept is particularly relevant in neurosurgical training where the acquired skill set demands performance of technically challenging tasks under pressure and where the consequences of error are significant. The evolution of VR simulation is discussed here within the context of neurosurgical training and its implications for resection of intracranial gliomas. VR holds the promise of providing a useful educational tool for neurosurgical residents to hone their surgical skills and for neurosurgeons to rehearse specific segments of the surgery prior to the actual operation. Also discussed are several important issues related to simulation and simulation-based training that will need to be addressed before widespread adoption of VR simulation as a useful technology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.311
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.167 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgress in neurological surgerySame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207