MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000632925 · doi:10.1115/1.4027057

Biomechanical Measurements of Stiffness and Strength for Five Types of Whole Human and Artificial Humeri

2014· article· en· W2000632925 on OpenAlexaff
Mina S.R. Aziz, Bruce Nicayenzi, Meghan Crookshank, Habiba Bougherara, Emil H. Schemitsch, Radovan Zdero

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStiffnessMaterials scienceCantileverHumerusAnatomyMathematicsComposite materialMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The human humerus is the third largest longbone and experiences 2-3% of all fractures. Yet, almost no data exist on its intact biomechanical properties, thus preventing researchers from obtaining a full understanding of humerus behavior during injury and after being repaired with fracture plates and nails. The aim of this experimental study was to compare the biomechanical stiffness and strength of "gold standard" fresh-frozen humeri to a variety of humerus models. A series of five types of intact whole humeri were obtained: human fresh-frozen (n = 19); human embalmed (n = 18); human dried (n = 15); artificial "normal" (n = 12); and artificial "osteoporotic" (n = 12). Humeri were tested under "real world" clinical loading modes for shear stiffness, torsional stiffness, cantilever bending stiffness, and cantilever bending strength. After removing geometric effects, fresh-frozen results were 585.8 ± 181.5 N/mm2 (normalized shear stiffness); 3.1 ± 1.1 N/(mm2 deg) (normalized torsional stiffness); 850.8 ± 347.9 N/mm2 (normalized cantilever stiffness); and 8.3 ± 2.7 N/mm2 (normalized cantilever strength). Compared to fresh-frozen values, statistical equivalence (p ≥ 0.05) was obtained for all four test modes (embalmed humeri), 1 of 4 test modes (dried humeri), 1 of 4 test modes (artificial "normal" humeri), and 1 of 4 test modes (artificial "osteoporotic" humeri). Age and bone mineral density versus experimental results had Pearson linear correlations ranging from R = -0.57 to 0.80. About 77% of human humeri failed via a transverse or oblique distal shaft fracture, whilst 88% of artificial humeri failed with a mixed transverse + oblique fracture. To date, this is the most comprehensive study on the biomechanics of intact human and artificial humeri and can assist researchers to choose an alternate humerus model that can substitute for fresh-frozen humeri.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations22
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomechanical EngineeringSame topicBone fractures and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207