MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361191260 · doi:10.1097/sih.0000000000000723

Development and Validation of a Mixed-Reality Simulator for Reducing Biopsy Core Deviation During Simulated Freehand Systematic Prostate Biopsy

2023· article· en· W4361191260 on OpenAlexaff
Samsun Lampotang, David Lizdas, W. Thomas Johnson, Vincent Mei, Jonathan Wakim, Xiang‐Yang Lou, Anthony DeStephens, Yahya Ayhan Acar, Louis Moy, Ardalan E. Ahmad, Wayne Brisbane, Thomas Stringer

Bibliographic record

VenueSimulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate biopsyVisualizationBiopsyComputer scienceCore (optical fiber)ProstateMedicineSet (abstract data type)Medical physicsSimulationUrologyRadiologyArtificial intelligenceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: We describe the development and validation of a mixed-reality prostate biopsy (PBx) simulator with built-in guidance aids and real-time 3-dimensional visualization. METHODS: We evaluated our simulator during one-on-one training sessions with urology residents and attendings from 2018 to 2022. Participants performed freehand, side-fire, double-sextant transrectal ultrasound-guided systematic prostate biopsy (sPBx). After a baseline assessment (first set of 12 biopsy cores), participants trained for 25 minutes with visualization and cognitive aids activated. Training was followed by an exit set of 12 biopsy cores without visualization or cognitive aids and afterward, subjective assessment by trainees of the simulator. Deviation is the shortest distance of the center of a core from its intended template location. RESULTS: Baseline deviations (mean ± SD) for residents (n = 24) and attendings (n = 4) were 13.4 ± 8.9 mm and 8.5 ± 3.6 mm ( P < 0.001), respectively. Posttraining deviations were 8.7 ± 6.6 mm and 7.6 ± 3.7 mm ( P = 0.271), respectively. Deviations between baseline and exit were decreased significantly for residents ( P < 0.001) but not for attendings ( P = 0.093). Overall feedback from participants was positive. Confidence in performing a PBx increased in novices after training ( P = 0.011) and did not change among attendings ( P = 0.180). CONCLUSIONS: A new PBx simulator can quantify and improve accuracy during simulated freehand sPBx while providing visualization and graphical feedback. Improved simulated sPBx accuracy could lead to more even distribution of biopsy cores within the prostate when performed in clinical settings, possibly reducing the high risk of missing an existing lesion and thus decreasing the time to initiating treatment, if indicated.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSimulation in Healthcare The Journal of the Society for Simulation in HealthcareSame topicProstate Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207