MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of Ski Binding Parameters on Knee Biomechanics: A Three-Dimensional Computational Study

2004· article· en· W1975799004 on OpenAlex
Nancy St-Onge, Yan Chevalier, Nicola Hagemeister, M. Van de Putte, Jacques A. de Guise

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWinter Sports Injuries and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité de MontréalHôpital Notre-Dame
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomechanicsOrthodonticsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMathematicsComputer scienceMedicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Downhill skiing is a relatively safe sport, but many potentially avoidable injuries do occur. Whereas tibia and ankle injuries have been declining, severe knee sprains usually involving the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) have increased from the 1970s to the 1990s. The goal of the present study was to evaluate the effect of the position of the binding pivot point and binding release characteristics on ACL strain during a phantom-foot fall. METHODS: We computed ACL strain using a biomechanical computer knee model to simulate the phantom-foot ACL-injury mechanism. This mechanism, which is one of the most common mechanisms of ACL injury in downhill skiing, occurs when the weight of the skier is on the inner edge of the ski during a backward fall, resulting in a sharp uncontrolled inward turn of the ski. RESULTS: The model predicts, that under simulated phantom-foot conditions, a binding with fast-release characteristics with a pivot positioned in front of the center of the boot produces less strain on the ACL. Current bindings have their pivot point approximately at the center of the heel radius. A pivot positioned at the back of the binding is more effective for sensing loads that occur at the tip of the ski. However, it is less effective for sensing loads that occur at the tail of the ski and, therefore, offers less protection during a phantom-foot fall. CONCLUSION: A binding with two pivot points, one positioned in front and the other at the back, could sense twist loads applied to the ski both at the front and at the back, and might, therefore, be a solution to reduce the occurrence of ACL injuries.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.286 · 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