Object detection to compute performance metrics for skill assessment in central venous catheterization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: As medical schools move toward competency-based medical education, they seek methods of quantifying trainee skill without human expert supervision. This study evaluates the efficacy of using object detection to track performance metrics in ultrasound-guided interventions, specifically central venous catheterization. While several studies have explored methods to automate the evaluation of these interventions, they typically rely on expensive, bulky markers. Therefore, a webcam-based approach is desirable. Methods: We used the Faster Region-Based Convolutional Neural Network object detection network developed by Ren et al. to track the two-dimensional path length and the usage time of seven tools used in central venous catheterization. Object detection relies solely on webcam imagery. Video data were collected from recordings of 20 central venous catheterization trials by four different medical students. Each recording was separated into individual frames, annotated, and inputted to the object detection network. Mean average precision was calculated for each fold and each tool. Results: The average mean average precision was 0.66. Between trials one and five, the average reduction in tool usage time was 52%, and the average reduction in 2D path length was 29%. Conclusions: The neural network was able to identify each tool with considerable accuracy. Furthermore, the neural network successfully computed differences in performance metrics that emerge as trainees gain experience. Faster Region-Based Convolutional Neural Network is an effective method to assess trainee skill in ultrasound-guided interventions
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".