MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059512049 · doi:10.1115/1.4024822

Compressive Follower Load Influences Cervical Spine Kinematics and Kinetics During Simulated Head-First Impact in an in Vitro Model

2013· article· en· W2059512049 on OpenAlexafffund
Amy Saari, Christopher R. Dennison, Qingan Zhu, Philip L. Morley, Thomas R. Oxland, Peter A. Cripton, Eyal Itshayek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsKinematicsBiomechanicsHead (geology)CadaverCervical spineAnatomyCoupling (piping)MechanicsBiomedical engineeringMedicineMaterials scienceGeologyPhysicsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current understanding of the biomechanics of cervical spine injuries in head-first impact is based on decades of epidemiology, mathematical models, and in vitro experimental studies. Recent mathematical modeling suggests that muscle activation and muscle forces influence injury risk and mechanics in head-first impact. It is also known that muscle forces are central to the overall physiologic stability of the cervical spine. Despite this knowledge, the vast majority of in vitro head-first impact models do not incorporate musculature. We hypothesize that the simulation of the stabilizing mechanisms of musculature during head-first osteoligamentous cervical spine experiments will influence the resulting kinematics and injury mechanisms. Therefore, the objective of this study was to document differences in the kinematics, kinetics, and injuries of ex vivo osteoligamentous human cervical spine and surrogate head complexes that were instrumented with simulated musculature relative to specimens that were not instrumented with musculature. We simulated a head-first impact (3 m/s impact speed) using cervical spines and surrogate head specimens (n = 12). Six spines were instrumented with a follower load to simulate in vivo compressive muscle forces, while six were not. The principal finding was that the axial coupling of the cervical column between the head and the base of the cervical spine (T1) was increased in specimens with follower load. Increased axial coupling was indicated by a significantly reduced time between head impact and peak neck reaction force (p = 0.004) (and time to injury (p = 0.009)) in complexes with follower load relative to complexes without follower load. Kinematic reconstruction of vertebral motions indicated that all specimens experienced hyperextension and the spectrum of injuries in all specimens were consistent with a primary hyperextension injury mechanism. These preliminary results suggest that simulating follower load that may be similar to in vivo muscle forces results in significantly different impact kinetics than in similar biomechanical tests where musculature is not simulated.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations23
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomechanical EngineeringSame topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207