MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7016075004

Validating a spinal simulation model using NeuroVR

2018· dissertation· en· W7016075004 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsDrillSuctionNeurosurgeryLumbarSample (material)Likert scale
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The NeuroTouch/NeuroVR simulator platform is a virtual reality simulator which has been used to compare the performance of expert surgeons to non-experts. Validation of NeuroTouch/NeuroVR is critical to the goal of using this simulator in neurosurgical training, evaluation and curriculum development.Methods: This study was conducted to assess the performance of both neurosurgeon and resident groups performing a left lumbar one level hemilaminectomy using a simulated drill in the dominant hand and simulated suction in the non-dominant hand. Thirteen novel NeuroTouch/NeuroVR derived metrics for spinal simulation were assessed including simple metrics such as: blood loss (BL), percentage of L3 lamina removed (PLR), total tip path length for the drill and suction (TTPL), volume of ligamentum flavum removed (VLFR), sum of forces applied (SFA) of the simulated drill and suction and number of times the thecal sac was touched by an active drill. Other metrics including the suction efficiency index, drill path length index (DPLI) and coordination index (CI) were also assessed. A Likert scale was used to assess the face and content validity of the simulated tasks.The hypotheses tested were: 1) that the novel performance metrics utilized would differentiate neurosurgical performance between neurosurgeon and resident groups and 2) that the simulated task assessed has face, content and construct validity. Results: The simple metrics assessed did not show statistically significant differences in performance between neurosurgeon and resident groups except in the SFA by suction on the ligamentum flavum (neurosurgeons vs junior residents). Advanced metrics showed statistically significant differences in suction efficiency and drill path length indices between the neurosurgeon and senior resident groups. The metrics did not show any significant differences between resident groups. Likert scale evaluation showed the means of overall realism and satisfaction of 3 and 3.5 respectively, and 91.7 % of the participants recommended the use of the simulated task in the training program. Conclusion: The NeuroTouch/NeuroVR platform utilizing the simulated spinal scenario and novel metrics differentiated the performance of expert and non-expert groups. The model demonstrated face and content validity. A number of limitations of the current model and the future improvements needed, are discussed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicSurgical Simulation and Training→French-language works237,207→