MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401726438 · doi:10.3138/jvme-2023-0131

Development and Evaluation of a Surgical Simulator and Assessment Rubric for Standing Castration of the Horse

2024· article· en· W4401726438 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Helen Braid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicVeterinary Practice and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRubricMedicineCastrationCurriculumSimulationMedical educationPsychologyComputer scienceMathematics educationInternal medicinePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In veterinary education, simulators are models or devices that can imitate a real patient or scenario and allow students to practice skills without the need for live patients. Castration is a common surgical procedure in all species, and the standing, open technique is frequently performed in horses. Although a simulator has been developed for equine closed castration, a simulator for standing castration in the horse has not yet been described. This two-part study focused on the design, creation, and evaluation of a simulator for teaching standing castration in the horse. A low-technology simulator was created using molded silicone testicles, cohesive bandage, stockings, and socks. A rubric was created for assessing performance using the simulator. Participants were recruited from three groups: university academic staff members ( n = 12, majority equine veterinarians), equine veterinarians working in private practice ( n = 9), and final-year veterinary students ( n = 28). Each group tested the simulator while being graded using the developed rubric, and participants completed an anonymous online feedback questionnaire. Feedback was positive overall, with 98% of respondents ( n = 48/49) stating that the model would be a useful addition to the veterinary curriculum. Furthermore, 100% of students reported that using the simulator increased their confidence in performing standing castration in horses. Evaluation of the model included assessment of responses from veterinarians and students regarding realism and usefulness of the simulator, comparison of rubric scores between veterinarians and students, and assessment of the reliability of the rubric. Median student rubric score was significantly lower than qualified veterinarians ( p < .001), and Cronbach's alpha demonstrated that there was adequate internal reliability in rubric scoring (α = .85). It was determined that the simulator is effective for teaching the steps of the surgical procedure and for increasing student confidence.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.567
GPT teacher head0.627
Teacher spread0.060 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Medical EducationSame topicVeterinary Practice and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207