MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7066766198

Investigating Visual-Spatial and Psychomotor Skills during Training for Laparoscopic Surgery

2012· other· en· W7066766198 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2012
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHistorical Astronomy and Related Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersManitoba Medical Service Foundation
KeywordsPsychomotor learningLaparoscopic surgeryGold standard (test)Task (project management)Quality (philosophy)WorkloadTraining (meteorology)Invasive surgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minimally invasive surgery, using laparoscopic techniques, is the standard surgical approach for many operative procedures and its indications continue to expand. Although hands-on training in the operating room is the gold standard for teaching surgical residents these techniques, there has been increased focus on the use of surgical simulators as cost effective and safe alternatives to learning on real patients. On simulators, trainees can practice defined tasks that relate to and build skills that are essential in the modern operating theatre. This project will examine the wrist and hand motions used during laparoscopic manipulation on a previously validated box-trainer task and an interactive, combined manual dexterity-cognitive training, mixed-reality video game platform. The student’s objectives will be to refine and run participants through tasks from the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) and the video-gaming environment. They will record and examine the motions made by individuals and determine motion metrics such as position, velocity and acceleration to gauge the quality and skill level of movements performed by individuals.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)→Same topicHistorical Astronomy and Related Studies→French-language works237,207→