MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987767167 · doi:10.4236/jbise.2014.77043

Experimental Validation of Subject-Specific Dynamics Model for Predicting Impact Force in Sideways Fall

2014· article· en· W1987767167 on OpenAlexafffund
Masoud Nasiri Sarvi, Yunhua Luo, Peidong Sun, Jun Ouyang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Science and Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaManitoba Health Research Council
KeywordsDynamics (music)Computer scienceModel validationSimulationFracture (geology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationOrthodonticsMedicineEngineeringPhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sideways fall has been identified as the most critical situation for the elderly to develop hip fractures. The impact force onto the greater trochanter is the key factor for predicting fracture risk. For the elderly, the impact force can only be determined by dynamics simulations, and the dynamics model must be first validated by experiments before it can be applied in clinic. In this study, subject-specific whole-body dynamics models constructed from dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images of the subjects were validated by controlled and protected fall tests using young volunteers. The validation results suggested that subject-specific dynamics model is much more accurate in predicting impact force induced in sideways fall than conventional non-subject-specific dynamics model. Therefore, subject-specific dynamics model can be applied in clinic to improve the accuracy of assessing hip fracture risk.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomedical Science and EngineeringSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207