Mechanical Evidence of Cervical Facet Capsule Injury During Whiplash
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A comparison of cervical facet capsule strain fields in cadaveric motion segments exposed to whiplash-like loads and failure loads. OBJECTIVES: To compare the maximum principal strain in the facet capsular ligament under combined shear, bending, and compressive loads with those required to injure the ligament. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The cervical facet capsular ligament is thought to be an anatomic site for whiplash injury, although the mechanism of its injury remains unclear. METHODS: Motion segments from seven female donors were exposed to quasi-static flexibility tests using posterior shear loads of 135 N applied to the superior vertebra under four compressive axial preloads up to 325 N. The right facet joint was then isolated and failed in posterior shear loading. The Lagrangian strain field in the right facet capsular ligament was calculated from capsular displacements determined by stereophotogrammetry. Statistical analyses examined the effect of axial compression on motion segment flexibility, and compared maximum principal capsular strain between the flexibility and failure tests. RESULTS: Capsular strain increased with applied shear load but did not vary with axial compressive load. The maximum principal strain reached during the flexibility tests was 61% +/- 33% of that observed in subcatastrophic failures of the isolated joints. Two specimens reached strains in their flexibility tests that were larger than their corresponding strains at subcatastrophic failure in the failure tests. CONCLUSIONS: The cervical facet capsular ligaments may be injured under whiplash-like loads of combined shear, bending, and compression. The results provide a mechanical basis for injury caused by whiplash loading.
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 it