MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386769339 · doi:10.1097/as9.0000000000000326

Force Profile as Surgeon-Specific Signature

2023· article· en· W4386769339 on OpenAlexafffund
Amir Baghdadi, Eddie Guo, Sanju Lama, Rahul Singh, Michael Chow, Garnette R. Sutherland

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSample (material)Task (project management)Pattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To investigate the notion that a surgeon's force profile can be the signature of their identity and performance. Summary background data: Surgeon performance in the operating room is an understudied topic. The advent of deep learning methods paired with a sensorized surgical device presents an opportunity to incorporate quantitative insight into surgical performance and processes. Using a device called the SmartForceps System and through automated analytics, we have previously reported surgeon force profile, surgical skill, and task classification. However, an investigation of whether an individual surgeon can be identified by surgical technique has yet to be studied. Methods: In this study, we investigate multiple neural network architectures to identify the surgeon associated with their time-series tool-tissue forces using bipolar forceps data. The surgeon associated with each 10-second window of force data was labeled, and the data were randomly split into 80% for model training and validation (10% validation) and 20% for testing. Data imbalance was mitigated through subsampling from more populated classes with a random size adjustment based on 0.1% of sample counts in the respective class. An exploratory analysis of force segments was performed to investigate underlying patterns differentiating individual surgical techniques. Results: In a dataset of 2819 ten-second time segments from 89 neurosurgical cases, the best-performing model achieved a micro-average area under the curve of 0.97, a testing F1-score of 0.82, a sensitivity of 82%, and a precision of 82%. This model was a time-series ResNet model to extract features from the time-series data followed by a linearized output into the XGBoost algorithm. Furthermore, we found that convolutional neural networks outperformed long short-term memory networks in performance and speed. Using a weighted average approach, an ensemble model was able to identify an expert surgeon with 83.8% accuracy using a validation dataset. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that each surgeon has a unique force profile amenable to identification using deep learning methods. We anticipate our models will enable a quantitative framework to provide bespoke feedback to surgeons and to track their skill progression longitudinally. Furthermore, the ability to recognize individual surgeons introduces the mechanism of correlating outcome to surgeon performance.

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)0.007
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.267
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.140 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Surgery OpenSame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207