Validation of an Experimental Testing Apparatus Simulating the Stance Phase of a Canine Pelvic Limb at Trot in the Normal and the Cranial Cruciate‐Deficient Stifle: An In Vitro Kinematic Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To design an experimental testing apparatus simulating a quasi-static model of the stance phase at a trot for a normal and a cranial cruciate ligament (CCL)-deficient stifle under near physiologic conditions. STUDY DESIGN: In vitro biomechanical study. ANIMALS: Paired pelvic limbs (n=6) from 3 dogs, weighing 29.5-31 kg. METHODS: With the limbs mounted in a testing apparatus, the stance phase of gait was simulated with a computerized sequence. Two conditions were evaluated: intact stifle and CCL-deficient stifle. Three-dimensional (3D) kinematics was measured with an optoelectronic system. Vertical reaction forces were also measured. Validation consisted of evaluating intra- and interspecimen variability of the 3D kinematic values of the stifle. Amplitude of motion and peak vertical force (PVF) as well as of kinematic values were also compared with in vivo curves reported in the literature. RESULTS: Mean intra- and interspecimen variability were low for all variables measured in both conditions (normal intact CCL, CCL deficient), and comparable to that reported in the literature. Amplitude of motion and PVF as well as kinematic values were also similar to those reported in vivo although 3D kinematics' values were lower for CCL-deficient stifles in our model. CONCLUSION: Results show that the testing apparatus generates reproducible motion on a loaded limb in a quasi-static way. Values are representative of the in vivo 3D values reported in the literature. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This model could be used to evaluate and compare different surgical techniques, and determine which surgical procedures have the potential to reestablish normal stifle kinematics.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".