ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2019
Wearable technology-based metrics for predicting operator performance during cardiac catheterisation.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02928796 (Attentional Capacity and Clinician Performance), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Attentional Capacity and Clinician Performance: Eye-Tracking Participants When Using a High-Fidelity Surgical Simulator That Emulates Cardiology Procedures
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mass Casualty Incident Training in Immersive Virtual Reality: Quasi-Experimental Evaluation of Multimethod Performance Indicators.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Simulation Training in Neuroangiography-Validation and Effectiveness.Clinical neuroradiology · 2021Article
- European expert consensus on a structured approach to training robotic-assisted low anterior resection using performance metrics.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2020Article
- Visual Behaviour Strategies of Operators during Catheter-Based Cardiovascular Interventions.Journal of medical systems · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionUnobtrusive metrics that can auto-assess performance during clinical procedures are of value. Three approaches to deriving wearable technology-based metrics are explored: (1) eye tracking, (2) psychophysiological measurements [e.g. electrodermal activity (EDA)] and (3) arm and hand movement via accelerometry. We also measure attentional capacity by tasking the operator with an additional task to track an unrelated object during the procedure.
methodsTwo aspects of performance are measured: (1) using eye gaze and psychophysiology metrics and (2) measuring attentional capacity via an additional unrelated task (to monitor a visual stimulus/playing cards). The aim was to identify metrics that can be used to automatically discriminate between levels of performance or at least between novices and experts. The study was conducted using two groups: (1) novice operators and (2) expert operators. Both groups made two attempts at a coronary angiography procedure using a full-physics virtual reality simulator. Participants wore eye tracking glasses and an E4 wearable wristband. Areas of interest were defined to track visual attention on display screens, including: (1) X-ray, (2) vital signs, (3) instruments and (4) the stimulus screen (for measuring attentional capacity).
resultsExperts provided greater dwell time (63% vs 42%, p = 0.03) and fixations (50% vs 34%, p = 0.04) on display screens. They also provided greater dwell time (11% vs 5%, p = 0.006) and fixations (9% vs 4%, p = 0.007) when selecting instruments. The experts' performance for tracking the unrelated object during the visual stimulus task negatively correlated with total errors (r = - 0.95, p = 0.0009). Experts also had a higher standard deviation of EDA (2.52 µS vs 0.89 µS, p = 0.04).
conclusionsEye tracking metrics may help discriminate between a novice and expert operator, by showing that experts maintain greater visual attention on the display screens. In addition, the visual stimulus study shows that an unrelated task can measure attentional capacity. Trial registration This work is registered through clinicaltrials.gov, a service of the U.S. National Health Institute, and is identified by the trial reference: NCT02928796.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.