MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessing endovascular team performances in a hybrid room using the Black Box system: a prospective cohort study

2022· article· en· W4297488519 on OpenAlexaff
Bart Doyen, Gilles Soenens, Blandine Maurel, Adrien Hertault, Lauren Gordon, Peter Vlerick, Frank Vermassen, Teodor Grantcharov, Isabelle Van Herzeele

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Safety and Medication Errors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProspective cohort studyBlack boxCohortMedical physicsSurgeryArtificial intelligenceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The hybrid room (HR) is a complex, high-risk environment, requiring teams (surgeons, anesthesiologists, nurses, technologists) to master various skills, including the 'As Low As Reasonably Achievable' principle of radiation safety. This prospective single center cohort reports the first use of the Operating Room Black Box (ORBB) in a HR. This medical data recording system captures procedural and audio-visual data to facilitate structured team performance analysis. METHODS: Patients planned for endovascular repair of an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR) or treatment of symptomatic iliac-femoral-popliteal atherosclerotic disease (Peripheral Vascular Interventions or PVI) were included. Validated measures and established assessment tools were used to assess (non-)technical skills, radiation safety performance and environmental distractions. RESULTS: Six EVAR and sixteen PVI procedures were captured. Technical performance for one EVAR was rated 19/35 on the procedure-specific scale, below the 'acceptable' score of 21. Technical skills were rated above acceptable in all PVI procedures. Shared decision making and leadership were rated highly in 12/22 cases, whereas surgical communication and nurses' task management were rated low in 14/22 cases. Team members rarely stepped back from the C-arm during digital subtraction angiography. Radiation safety behavior was scored below 'acceptable' in 14/22 cases. A median (interquartile range) number of 12 (6-23) auditory distractions was observed per procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The ORBB facilitates holistic workplace-based assessment of endovascular performance in a HR by combining objective assessment parameters and rating scale-based evaluations. Strengths and weaknesses were identified in team members' (non-)technical and radiation safety practices. This technology has the potential to improve vascular surgical practice, though human input remains crucial. (NCT04854278).

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Cardiovascular SurgerySame topicPatient Safety and Medication ErrorsFrench-language works237,207