MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393409946 · doi:10.1167/tvst.13.4.5

Democratizing Vitreoretinal Surgery Training With a Portable and Affordable Virtual Reality Simulator in the Metaverse

2024· article· en· W4393409946 on OpenAlexaff
Fares Antaki, Cédryk Doucet, Daniel Milad, Charles‐Édouard Giguère, Benoı̂t Ozell, Karim Hammamji

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Vision Science & Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Macular Surgery
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire en santé mentale de MontréalPolytechnique MontréalUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de QuébecCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVitrectomyHeadsetComputer scienceVirtual realitySimulationMedicineCore (optical fiber)OphthalmologyHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate RetinaVR, an affordable, portable, and fully immersive virtual reality (VR) simulator for vitreoretinal surgery training. Methods: We built RetinaVR as a standalone app on the Meta Quest 2 VR headset. It simulates core vitrectomy, peripheral shaving, membrane peeling, and endolaser application. In a validation study (n = 20 novices and experts), we measured: efficiency, safety, and module-specific performance. We first explored unadjusted performance differences through an effect size analysis. Then, a linear mixed-effects model was used to isolate the impact of age, sex, expertise, and experimental run on performance. Results: Experts were significantly safer in membrane peeling but not when controlling for other factors. Experts were significantly better in core vitrectomy, even when controlling for other factors (P = 0.014). Heatmap analysis of endolaser applications showed more consistent retinopexy among experts. Age had no impact on performance, but male subjects were faster in peripheral shaving (P = 0.036) and membrane peeling (P = 0.004). A learning curve was demonstrated with improving efficiency at each experimental run for all modules. Repetition also led to improved safety during membrane peeling (P = 0.003), and better task-specific performance during core vitrectomy (P = 0.038), peripheral shaving (P = 0.011), and endolaser application (P = 0.043). User experience was favorable to excellent in all spheres. Conclusions: RetinaVR demonstrates potential as an affordable, portable training tool for vitreoretinal surgery. Its construct validity is established, showing varying performance in a way that correlates with experimental runs, age, sex, and level of expertise. Translational Relevance: Fully immersive VR technology could revolutionize surgical training, making it more accessible, especially in developing nations.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations13
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational Vision Science & TechnologySame topicRetinal and Macular SurgeryFrench-language works237,207