MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128947454 · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000003958

The Surgical Program in Innovation (SPIN): A Design and Prototyping Curriculum for Surgical Trainees

2021· article· en· W3128947454 on OpenAlex
Daniel J. Wong, David Miranda-Nieves, Prathima Nandivada, Madhukar S. Patel, Daniel A. Hashimoto, Daniel Kent, José Gómez-Márquez, Samuel J. Lin, Henry J. Feldman, Elliot L. Chaikof

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

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsCommercializationCurriculumMedical educationProcess (computing)Graduate medical educationProduct (mathematics)MedicineComputer sciencePsychologyBusinessMarketingPedagogyAccreditation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PROBLEM: Health professions education does not routinely incorporate training in innovation or creative problem solving. Although some models of innovation education within graduate medical education exist, they often require participants' full-time commitment and removal from clinical training or rely upon participants' existing expertise. There is a need for curricula that teach innovation skills that will enable trainees to identify and solve unmet clinical challenges in everyday practice. To address this gap in surgical graduate education, the authors developed the Surgical Program in Innovation (SPIN). APPROACH: SPIN, a 6-month workshop-based curriculum, was established in 2016 in the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Department of Surgery to teach surgical trainees the basics of the innovation process, focusing on surgeon-driven problem identification, product design, prototype fabrication, and initial steps in the commercialization process. Participating surgical residents and graduate students attend monthly workshops taught by medical, engineering, and medical technology (MedTech) industry faculty. Participants collaborate in teams to develop a novel device, fabricate a protype, and pitch their product to a panel of judges. OUTCOMES: From academic years 2015-2016 to 2017-2018, 49 trainees, including 41 surgical residents, participated in SPIN. Across this period, 13 teams identified an unmet need, ideated a solution, and designed and pitched a novel device. Ten teams fabricated prototypes. The 22 SPIN participants who responded to both pre- and postcourse surveys reported significant increases in confidence in generating problem statements, computer-aided design, fabrication of a prototype, and initial commercialization steps (product pitching and business planning). NEXT STEPS: Incorporating innovation education and design thinking into clinical training will prove essential in preparing future physicians to be lifelong problem finders and solvers. The authors plan to expand SPIN to additional clinical specialties, as well as to assess its impact in fostering future innovation and collaboration among program participants.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.292 · 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