MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040021355 · doi:10.1177/0954411912438038

Biomechanical measurements of axial crush injury to the distal condyles of human and synthetic femurs

2012· article· en· W2040021355 on OpenAlexaff
Meghan Crookshank, Jason Coquim, Michael Olsen, Emil H. Schemitsch, Habiba Bougherara, Rad Zdero

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part H Journal of Engineering in Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCondyleFemurMaterials scienceAnatomyDisplacement (psychology)Biomedical engineeringOrthodonticsMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Few studies have evaluated the 'bulk' mechanical properties of human longbones and even fewer have compared human tissue to the synthetic longbones increasingly being used by researchers. Distal femur fractures, for example, comprise about 6% of all femur fractures, but the mechanical properties of the distal condyles of intact human and synthetic femurs have not been well quantified in the literature. To this end, the distal portions of a series of 16 human fresh-frozen femurs and six synthetic femurs were prepared identically for mechanical testing. Using a flat metal plate, an axial 'crush' force was applied in-line with the long axis of the femurs. The two femur groups were statistically compared and values correlated to age, size, and bone quality. Results yielded the following: crush stiffness (human, 1545 +/- 728 N/mm; synthetic, 3063 +/- 1243 N/mm; p = 0.002); crush strength (human, 10.3 +/- 3.1 kN; synthetic, 12.9 < or = 1.7 kN; p = 0.074); crush displacement (human, 6.1 +/- 1.8 mm; synthetic, 2.8 +/- 0.3 mm; p = 0.000); and crush energy (human, 34.8 +/- 15.9J; synthetic, 18.1 +/- 5.7J; p = 0.023). For the human femurs, there were poor correlations between mechanical properties versus age, size, and bone quality (R2 < or = 0.18), with the exception of crush strength versus bone mineral density (R2 = 0.33) and T-score (R2 = 0.25). Human femurs failed mostly by condyle 'roll back' buckling (15 of 16 cases) and/or unicondylar or bicondylar fracture (7 of 16 cases), while synthetic femurs all failed by wedging apart of the condyles resulting in either fully or partially displaced condylar fractures (6 of 6 cases). These findings have practical implications on the use of a flat plate load applicator to reproduce real-life clinical failure modes of human femurs and the appropriate use of synthetic femurs. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to have done such an assessment on human and synthetic femurs.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.284
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 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

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part H Journal of Engineering in MedicineSame topicBone fractures and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207