Design and validation of a cadaveric knee joint loading device compatible with magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Design and validation of a magnetic resonance and computed tomography compatible device capable of applying physiologically relevant muscle forces to cadaveric knee joints with high levels of repeatability and reproducibility. METHODS: Repeatability and reproducibility were assessed with two porcine stifle joints. Load was applied to joints at full extension, five and 15 degrees of flexion through two cables simulating the lines of action of the quadriceps and hamstrings muscles. Five repeatability and five reproducibility trials were performed at each flexion angle. Standard deviations (SDs) of joint angle and load were recorded. RESULTS: For repeatability, the maximum SDs for joint angle were 1.26° (flexion), 1.54° (ab/adduction) and 0.90° (in/external rotation). The maximum SDs for joint load were 4.60 N (anterior/posterior), 7.36 N (medial/lateral), and 42.6N (axial). For reproducibility, the maximum SDs for joint angle were 0.84° (flexion), 0.66° (ab/adduction) and 0.92° (in/external rotation). The maximum SDs for joint load were 6.40 N (anterior/posterior), 11.7 N (medial/lateral), and 39.7 N (axial). CONCLUSIONS: This level of repeatability and reproducibility is within intra-subject variability of measured gait kinematics. Therefore, this device is considered to be an effective tool for in vitro testing of knee soft tissue repair.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".