MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286508400 · doi:10.3138/jvme-2021-0159

Use of 3D Printing Technology to Create a Canine Simulator for Cerebrospinal Fluid Sampling at the Lumbar Subarachnoid Space

2022· article· en· W4286508400 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Megan Madden, Richard Collins, Tobias Schwarz, Anna Suñol

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLumbarSimulationCadaverReplicateCerebrospinal fluidMedicineComputer scienceSubarachnoid spaceSurgeryPathologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) sampling at the lumbar subarachnoid space (LSS) is technically challenging to learn. Currently, training relies on cadaver availability or performance in a clinical scenario. This study aims to develop and validate a low-cost, high-fidelity simulator to train in this technique. Using three-dimensional printing technology, a model of a healthy adult dog’s lumbosacral vertebral column was produced. The model was augmented with synthetic materials and a fluidic system to replicate all procedural steps and permit successful CSF collection. The simulator was validated by four experts, who rated it highly across multiple criteria. Final-year veterinary students were recruited to take part in practical sessions using either the simulator ( n = 16) or a cadaver ( n = 16). Performance was recorded for each student, and feedback was obtained using an anonymous online survey. Student performance was similar between groups ( p = .2), with 87.5% and 68.75% of students in the simulator and cadaver group, respectively, successfully placing the needle into the LSS. All successful students in the simulator group were able to obtain a CSF sample, compared with none in the cadaver group. No difference in the number of attempts was detected between groups ( p > .99), with most students taking more than three attempts. User experience was similar between groups, with 93.8% of students in each group rating the session as a positive learning experience. In summary, we demonstrate the validity of a novel, low-cost, and anatomically precise simulator that can be used for teaching CSF sampling at the LSS.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Medical EducationSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207