MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A Novel Pelvic Hand-Sewn Bowel Anastomosis Simulator for Surgical Training <sup>*</sup>

2025· article· en· W4416963039 on OpenAlexaff
Ruxandra Penta, Robert Harutyunyan, Wenjing He, Ashley Vergis, Krista Hardy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
FundersDepartment of Surgery
KeywordsPelvisHaptic technologySimulation trainingAnastomosisCadaveric spasmTraining (meteorology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hand-sewn bowel anastomosis (HSBA) is an important skill in general surgery. Due to technological advances such as surgical staplers for bowel, HSBA has become less common thus reducing general surgery residents' exposure to the technique. Difficult anatomical locations such as the pelvis face an even lower clinical exposure, though proficiency is crucial as consequences can include significant morbidity and mortality. Opportunities to develop this skill has been delegated primarily to surgical simulators. Given that cadaveric and porcine training is cost prohibitive and not readily available, the aim of this paper is to present a novel, reusable and cost-efficient simulator for HSBA in the pelvis. The simulator was built using advanced 3D printing methods and silicone-based materials to mimic a real pelvic cavity with emphasis on creating hyper realistic multi layered bowel. This simulator was reviewed by eight experts who performed an HSBA in the pelvic cavity followed by completing a Likert-based scale questionnaire resulting in an overall 92% score, endorsing it as a potential tool for general surgery training. In addition, the simulator is reproducible, provides tactical and haptic feedback to the user making it the first of its kind to combine HSBA in a difficult anatomical region such as the pelvis.Clinical Relevance-This novel pelvis HSBA simulator has the potential to make significant contributions to general surgery residency training to bridge the gap between textbooks and the operating room in a reproducible and cost-effective fashion.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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