MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Desing and realization of a computer-assisted nephrostomy guidance system

2023· article· en· W4386952437 on OpenAlexaff
Fatou Ndiaye, Leah Groves, Rebecca Hisey, Tamás Ungi, Idy Diop, Parvin Mousavi, Gábor Fichtinger, Mamadou Samba Camara

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowComputer scienceRealization (probability)NephrostomySet (abstract data type)Intervention (counseling)DatabaseMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and purpose: Nowadays, computerized nephrostomy techniques exist. Although relatively safe, several factors make it difficult for inexperienced users. A computer-assisted nephrostomy guidance system has been studied to increase the success rate of this intervention and reduce the work and difficulties encountered by the actors. Methods: To design the system, two methods will be studied. Following this study, this system was designed based on method 2. SmartSysNephro is composed of a hardware part whose manipulations made by the user are visualized and assisted by the computer. This nephrostomy procedure that the user simulates is monitored by webcam. Using the data from this Intel Real Sense webcam, allowed to propose a CNN YOLO model. Results: The results obtained show that the objectives set have been achieved globally. The SmartSysNephro system gives real time warning when the surgeon deviates from the standard workflow. It allows monitoring of the nephrostomy procedure via webcam. It is therefore relying on tracking, and it also has the potential to identify workflow tasks in video using the YOLO model. Conclusion: SmartSysNephro shows that the skills of the users can be greatly improved during the intervention because they will benefit from the assistance of the end-to-end system. Therefore, the success rate of nephrostomy increases, and the difficulties encountered by the actors decrease considerably.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSurgical Simulation and Training→French-language works237,207→