Nondominant Hand Skills Spatial and Psychomotor Analysis During a Complex Virtual Reality Neurosurgical Task—A Case Series Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Virtual reality surgical simulators provide detailed psychomotor performance data, allowing qualitative and quantitative assessment of hand function. The nondominant hand plays an essential role in neurosurgery in exposing the operative area, assisting the dominant hand to optimize task execution, and hemostasis. Outlining expert-level nondominant hand skills may be critical to understand surgical expertise and aid learner training. OBJECTIVE: To (1) provide validity for the simulated bimanual subpial tumor resection task and (2) to use this simulation in qualitative and quantitative evaluation of nondominant hand skills for bipolar forceps utilization. METHODS: In this case series study, 45 right-handed participants performed a simulated subpial tumor resection using simulated bipolar forceps in the nondominant hand for assisting the surgery and hemostasis. A 10-item questionnaire was used to assess task validity. The nondominant hand skills across 4 expertise levels (neurosurgeons, senior trainees, junior trainees, and medical students) were analyzed by 2 visual models and performance metrics. RESULTS: Neurosurgeon median (range) overall satisfaction with the simulated scenario was 4.0/5.0 (2.0-5.0). The visual models demonstrated a decrease in high force application areas on pial surface with increased expertise level. Bipolar-pia mater interactions were more focused around the tumoral region for neurosurgeons and senior trainees. These groups spent more time using the bipolar while interacting with pia. All groups spent significantly higher time in the left upper pial quadrant than other quadrants. CONCLUSION: This work introduces new approaches for the evaluation of nondominant hand skills which may help surgical trainees by providing both qualitative and quantitative feedback.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".