MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281993506 · doi:10.7759/cureus.25481

The Development and Initial End-Point User Feedback of a 3D-Printed Adult Proximal Tibia IO Simulator

2022· article· en· W4281993506 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mithusa Sivanathan, Julia Micallef, Krystina M Clarke, Bruno Gino, Shitji Joshi, Sandy Abdo, Dania Buttu, Marvin Mnaymneh, Samyah Siraj, Andrei Torres, Gordon Brock, Dale Button, Carla Pereira, Adam Dubrowski

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsDurham CollegeMemorial University of NewfoundlandOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic shortageMedicine3d printedPoint (geometry)SimulationTraining (meteorology)End pointMedical physicsComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionBiomedical engineeringReal-time computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intraosseous infusion (IO) remains an underutilized technique for obtaining vascular access in adults, despite its potentially life-saving benefits in trauma patients. In rural and remote areas, shortage of training equipment and human capacity (i.e., simulators) are the main contributors to the shortage of local training courses aiming at the development and maintenance of IO skills. Specifically, current training equipment options available for trainees include commercially available simulators, which are often expensive, or animal tissues, which lack human anatomical features that are necessary for optimal learning and pose logistical and ethical issues related to practice on live animals. Three-dimensional (3D) printing provides the means to create cost-effective, anatomically correct simulators for practicing IO where existing simulators may be difficult to access, especially in remote areas. This technical report aims to describe the development of maxSIMIO, a 3D-printed adult proximal tibia IO simulator, and present feedback on the design features from a clinical co-design team consisting of 18 end-point users. Overall, the majority of the feedback was positive and highlighted that the maxSIMIO simulator was helpful for learning and developing the IO technique. The majority of the clinical team responders also agreed that the simulator was more anatomically accurate compared to other simulators they have used in the past. Finally, the survey results indicated that on average, the simulator is acceptable as a training tool. Notable suggestions for improvement included increasing the stability of the individual parts of the model (such as tightening the skin and securing the bones), enhancing the anatomical accuracy of the experience (such as adding a fibula), making the bones harder, increasing the size of the patella, making it more modular (to minimize costs related to maintenance), and improving the anatomical positioning of the knee joint (i.e., slightly bent in the knee joint). In summary, the clinical team, located in rural and remote areas in Canada, found the 3D-printed simulator to be a functional tool for practicing the intraosseous technique. The outcome of this report supports the use of this cost-effective simulator for simulation-based medical education for remote and rural areas anywhere in the world.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.221

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207