MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mapping the Structural Properties of the Lumbosacral Vertebral Endplates

2001· article· en· W1998620544 on OpenAlex

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

VenueSpine · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsVancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadaveric spasmMedicineLumbarLumbosacral jointSacrumAnatomyStiffnessLumbar vertebraeBiomechanicsCadaverMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: A biomechanical investigation using indentation tests in a human cadaveric model to seek variation in the structural properties across the lower lumbar and sacral endplates. OBJECTIVES: To determine 1) if there are regional differences in endplate strength and 2) whether any differences identified are affected by spinal level (lumbar spine vs. sacrum) or endplate (superior vs. inferior). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: It has been postulated that some regions of the vertebral body may be stronger than others. Conclusive data, either supporting or disproving this theory, would be valuable for both spine surgeons and implant designers because one mode of failure of interbody implants is subsidence into one or both adjacent vertebrae. METHODS: Indentation tests were performed at 27 standardized test sites in 62 bony endplates of intact human vertebrae (L3-S1) using a 3-mm-diameter, hemispherical indenter with a test rate of 0.2 mm/sec to a depth of 3 mm. The failure load and stiffness at each test site were determined using the load-displacement curves. Three-way analyses of variance were used to analyze the resulting data. RESULTS: Both the failure load and stiffness varied significantly across the endplate surfaces (P < 0.0001), with posterolateral regions being stronger and stiffer than the central regions. Characteristic distributions were identified in the lumbar superior, lumbar inferior, and sacral endplates. The failure load distributions were found to differ in 1) the superior lumbar and sacral endplates (P = 0.0077), 2) the inferior lumbar and sacral endplates (P = 0.0014), and 3) the superior and inferior lumbar endplates (P < 0.0001). The sacral and inferior lumbar endplates were both found to be stronger than the superior lumbar endplates (sacrum, P = 0.054; inferior, P = 0.008) but were not themselves significantly different (P = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Highly significant regional strength and stiffness variations were identified in the lumbar and sacral endplates. The center of the bone, where implants are currently placed, is the weakest part of the lumbar endplates and is not the strongest region of the sacral endplate.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.217 · 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