Secondary Stability of a Composite Biomimetic Cementless Hip Stem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Total hip replacement is one of the most successful and frequent surgery in the world; over a million of these procedures are performed every year, and the numbers are growing with the ageing of the general population. The patients who receive these implants also are younger nowadays. Major problems however still subsist with traditional hip stems: aseptic loosening is a common cause of revision surgery. The main causes of aseptic loosening are both mechanical and biological in origin. Mechanical causes include stress shielding and micromotions at bone-implant interface, and biological causes are mainly osteolysis triggered by wear debris formation and bone remodeling. To remedy the mechanical issues, a biomimetic concept was developed (patent pending): an osseointegrated stem with mechanical properties close to those of the surrounding bone would avoid both stress shielding and micromotions phenomena. To evaluate this concept, a finite element model (FEM) was developed and used to simulate bone resorption, stress shielding and micromotions [1]. The preliminary results were promising as those problems were significantly reduced with the new prosthesis, but the model still remained to be proved accurate; its bone-implant interface was of particular interest because of its decisive influence on micromotions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".