MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412166666 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2025.10297

P.151 The development of an image-guided, multi-biopsy tool for neurosurgical applications

2025· article· en· W4412166666 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Katharine Andrews, Heidi‐Lynn Ploeg, J Purzner, T Purzner

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopsyMedicineImage (mathematics)RadiologyMedical physicsComputer scienceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Molecular characterization of spatially heterogeneous tumors, such as primary brain tumors, requires precise, contamination-free tissue collection. This study develops a novel biopsy instrument enabling efficient, spatially registered tissue collection across tumors and surgical cavities, advancing personalized tumor characterization and treatment. Methods: Iterative modeling and 3D printing were used to develop prototypes, which underwent proof-of-concept and phantom testing. Final device evaluation compared the novel capsule biopsy tool to Yasargil tumor grasping forceps, with six neurosurgeons and six students conducting tests on porcine brain. Additionally, intraoperative samples were collected, with spatial coordinates recorded on preoperative scans. Results: The design features a capsule that attaches to the end of a Frazier suction. When suction is applied, an internal piston secures the sample, which can later be released before or after tissue fixation. The capsule method reduced variability in sample weight and collection time compared to Yasargil forceps, maintaining tissue integrity without contamination or instrument failure. Notably, students demonstrated proficiency comparable to experienced surgeons, highlighting the tool’s ease of use. Conclusions: This low-cost, optically tracked biopsy tool provides an efficient, reliable method for spatially precise tissue collection, meeting the demands of precision medicine and translational research.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.329
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→