MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023313540 · doi:10.1002/jor.1100180422

Effect of <i>in vitro</i> testing over extended periods on the low‐load mechanical behaviour of dense connective tissues

2000· article· en· W2023313540 on OpenAlexaff
Graham J.W. King, Corrie L. Pillon, James A. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic Research® · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CentreLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIn vitroConnective tissueMaterials scienceComposite materialChemistryMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many biomechanical studies are performed on dense connective tissues in the laboratory over a substantial time period; however, the effect of the in vitro testing environment on the cyclic load-relaxation behaviour of these structures is not well established. This study evaluated the effect of long duration of testing on ligament viscoelastic behaviour, using the rabbit femur-medial collateral ligament-tibia complex as a model. Dissected rabbit knee joints were mounted on a materials testing machine, and isolated ligament complexes were cycled at a frequency of one cycle/min to a fixed displacement of 0.7 mm for an 18-hour period. After an initial period of exponential load relaxation, the cyclic peak loads slowly decreased over the 18-hour period. The average decrease in the cyclic peak load between 0.5 and 18.0 hours was 0.26% (of the original peak load) per hour (r2 = 0.934), or a total of 8.6+/-4.6% over this period (p < 0.0001). Thus, low-load testing of dense connective tissues in the laboratory over extended periods significantly alters their biomechanical behaviour, and these changes should be considered in long-term laboratory-based studies of dense connective tissues.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.368
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 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

Citations14
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Orthopaedic Research®Same topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207