MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224291472 · doi:10.1177/19433875221083231

Printing in Time for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Trauma Surgery: Key Parameters to Factor in

2022· article· en· W4224291472 on OpenAlexaff
Léonard Bergeron, Michelle Bonapace-Potvin, François Bergeron

Bibliographic record

VenueCraniomaxillofacial Trauma & Reconstruction · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversité TÉLUQUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTrauma centerFacial trauma3D printingSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Study Design: retrospective cohort study. Objective: 3D printing is used extensively in cranio-maxillo-facial (CMF) surgery, but difficulties remain for surgeons to implement it in an acute trauma setting because critical information is often omitted from reports. Therefore, we developed an in-house printing pipeline for a variety of cranio-maxillo-facial fractures and characterized each step required to print a model in time for surgery. Methods: All consecutive patients requiring in-house 3D printed models in a level 1 trauma center for acute trauma surgery between March and November 2019 were identified and analyzed. Results: Sixteen patients requiring the printing of 25 in-house models were identified. Virtual Surgical Planning time ranged from 0h 08min to 4h 41min (mean = 1h 46min). The overall printing phase per model (pre-processing, printing, and post-processing) ranged from 2h 54min to 27h 24min (mean = 9h 19min). The overall success rate of prints was 84%. Filament cost was between $0.20 and $5.00 per model (mean = $1.56). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that in-house 3D printing can be done reliably in a relatively short period of time, therefore allowing 3D printing usage for acute facial fracture treatment. When compared to outsourcing, in-house printing shortens the process by avoiding shipping delays and by having a better control over the printing process. For time-critical prints, other time-consuming steps need to be considered, such as virtual planning, pre-processing of 3D files, post-processing of prints, and print failure rate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCraniomaxillofacial Trauma & ReconstructionSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207