MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401242544 · doi:10.2196/52631

Objective Comparison of the First-Person–View Live Streaming Method Versus Face-to-Face Teaching Method in Improving Wound Suturing Skills for Skin Closure in Surgical Clerkship Students: Randomized Controlled Trial

2024· article· en· W4401242544 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Freda Halim, Allen Widysanto, Petra Octavian Perdana Wahjoepramono, Valeska Siulinda Candrawinata, Andi Setiawan Budihardja, Andry Irawan, Taufik Sudirman, Natalia Maria Christina, Heru Sutanto Koerniawan, Jephtah Furano Lumban Tobing, Veli Sungono, Mona Marlina, Eka Julianta Wahjoepramono

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintRandomized controlled trialClosure (psychology)MedicineFace (sociological concept)Face-to-faceMedical educationSurgeryComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The use of digital online teaching media in improving the surgical skills of medical students is indispensable, yet it is still not widely explored objectively. The first-person-view online teaching method may be more effective as it provides more realism to surgical clerkship students in achieving basic surgical skills. Objective: This study aims to objectively assess the effectiveness of the first-person-view live streaming (LS) method using a GoPro camera compared to the standard face-to-face (FTF) teaching method in improving simple wound suturing skills in surgical clerkship students. Methods: A prospective, parallel, nonblinded, single-center, randomized controlled trial was performed. Between January and April 2023, clerkship students of the Department of Surgery, Pelita Harapan University, were randomly selected and recruited into either the LS or FTF teaching method for simple interrupted suturing skills. All the participants were assessed objectively before and 1 week after training, using the direct observational procedural skills (DOPS) method. DOPS results and poststudy questionnaires were analyzed. Results: A total of 74 students were included in this study, with 37 (50%) participants in each group. Paired analysis of each participant's pre-experiment and postexperiment DOPS scores revealed that the LS method's outcome is comparable to the FTF method's outcome (LS: mean 27.5, SD 20.6 vs FTF: mean 24.4, SD 16.7; P=.48) in improving the students' surgical skills. Conclusions: First-person-view LS training sessions could enhance students' ability to master simple procedural skills such as simple wound suturing and has comparable results to the current FTF teaching method. Teaching a practical skill using the LS method also gives more confidence for the participants to perform the procedure independently. Other advantages of the LS method, such as the ability to study from outside the sterile environment, are also promising. We recommend improvements in the audiovisual quality of the camera and a stable internet connection before performing the LS teaching method.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.415 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical EducationSame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207