Back

Computer-Vision Procedural Telemetry for Airway Guidance: A Public 30-Run Manikin Evidence-Package Audit

Napier, A.; Klement, S.; Fedeles, B.

2026-06-29 health informatics
10.64898/2026.06.26.26356677 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Computer vision-enabled airway workflows can turn airway video into timestamped model-observation fields, but later blinded review and training studies require source-video linkage, run identifiers, quality-control status, and app/model provenance. Objective: To audit whether a public post-reconciliation 30-run manikin evidence package from a computer vision-enabled video laryngoscopy workflow preserved prespecified, video-linked procedural telemetry in structured JSON, while keeping detection accuracy, report quality, and reviewer agreement outside the current claim. Methods: Thirty manikin runs were captured on a HEALTHIBLE Intubation Simulator using an IntuBlade device connected to an iPhone 15 Pro Max. Six predefined conditions were tested with five runs each in planned round-robin order by a board-certified emergency physician operator. The author-affiliated team analyzed corrected Study Metrics JSON exports, the video manifest, app/model metadata, QC fields, and the frozen package checker after reconciliation against the assigned run guide. Blinded video review, independent analysis, and report-quality adjudication were not performed. Results: After reconciliation, all 30 rows contained parseable Study Metrics JSON, a companion videoFilename, run-named Drive video status, QC pass status, and corrected identifiers matching assigned row labels (30/30 for each completeness field; descriptive exact binomial 95% CI, 88.4% to 100.0%). App/model metadata were complete: appVersion 3.3.0 (75), source revision b94cd63, Navigation model, model version 31, and detection threshold 0.1. The exported JSON target-state flag was true in 25 of 25 target-condition rows (95% CI, 86.3% to 100.0%) and false in 5 of 5 no-target controls (95% CI, 47.8% to 100.0%), with zero glottic-detected frames and zero acceptable-view time in no-target controls. Among target-condition rows, median time to first model-detected glottic target was 2 seconds (IQR 1 to 3), median acceptable-view duration was 2.2 seconds (IQR 1.0 to 3.8), and median glottic visibility was 35.8% (IQR 25.8 to 45.6). Interpretation: The corrected package supports a bounded formative claim: simulated airway video can be represented as specified, video-linked computer-vision procedural telemetry after documented reconciliation. It supports package completeness, traceability, and assigned-condition consistency only; it does not establish native uncorrected export reliability, computer-vision detection accuracy, report quality, reviewer agreement, training effectiveness, autonomous guidance, tube-placement confirmation, clinical efficacy, or patient outcomes.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 1%
12.8%
2
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 18%
9.9%
3
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
7.3%
4
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.8%
5
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
6.3%
6
CHEST
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.5%
7
JAMA
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
50% of probability mass above
8
BMJ
51 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.3%
9
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.1%
10
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
11
Translational Vision Science & Technology
39 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
12
Emergency Medicine Journal
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
13
Annals of Internal Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
14
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
15
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
31 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.3%
16
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
17
JAMIA Open
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
18
Clinical and Translational Science
22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
19
Critical Care Explorations
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
20
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
21
Trials
29 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.0%
22
Critical Care Medicine
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.0%
23
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
14 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
24
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 72%
0.9%
25
JMIR Research Protocols
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
26
British Journal of Anaesthesia
17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
27
JAMA Pediatrics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
28
International Journal of Medical Informatics
26 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
29
Journal of Clinical Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
30
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 56%
0.9%