MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229450004 · doi:10.4258/hir.2022.28.2.170

Implementing Augmented Reality to Facilitate the Learning of Oral Histology

2022· article· en· W4229450004 on OpenAlexafffund
Nazlee Sharmin, A. Chow, Dominic Votta, Nathanial Maeda

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Informatics Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsAugmented realityComputer scienceHistologyMedicineMultimediaHuman–computer interactionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The study of biological materials under a microscope is known as histology, which is one of the most challenging subjects for students. Our objective was to develop a learning tool that can reduce the extrinsic load of studying histology and make learning enjoyable and flexible. We used augmented reality (AR) to create a cellphone application called Dental AR. With Dental AR, students can use their cellphones as dynamic flashcards to hide or reveal the annotations of a histology slide. Our application enables students to study, practice, and self-test oral histology knowledge at their own pace. METHODS: We used Unity3D with Vuforia to develop Dental AR. To generate a set of target images, oral histology glass slides were scanned and converted to digital images. Annotated versions of the slides were used as output for the corresponding target images. To understand user experiences and satisfaction with Dental AR, first-year dentistry students were invited to complete an online survey. RESULTS: Dental AR was successfully developed and released on both the Apple and Google Play online app stores. The survey of dentistry students indicated overall satisfaction with Dental AR and willingness to use similar applications in other subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Dental AR can be used for in-class activities, gamification, and providing students with practice questions to study and self-test outside the classroom. This application can be expanded in the future to incorporate more target images, videos, and interactive components to make learning histology less challenging and more enjoyable.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.336
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Informatics ResearchSame topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207