The effect of the screw pull-out rate on cortical screw purchase in unreamed and reamed synthetic long bones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Orthopaedic fracture fixation constructs are typically mounted on to human long bones using cortical screws. Biomechanical studies are increasingly employing commercially available synthetic bones. The aim of this investigation was to examine the effect of the screw pull-out rate and canal reaming on the cortical bone screw purchase strength in synthetic bone. Cylinders made of synthetic material were used to simulate unreamed (foam-filled) and reamed (hollow) human long bone with an outer diameter of 35 mm and a cortex wall thickness of 4 mm. The unreamed and reamed cylinders each had 56 sites along their lengths into which orthopaedic cortical bone screws (major diameter, 3.5 mm) were inserted to engage both cortices. The 16 test groups (n = 7 screw sites per group) had screws extracted at rates of 1 mm/ min, 5 mm/min, 10 mm/min, 20 mm/min, 30 mm/min, 40 mm/min, 50 mm/min, and 60 mm/ min. The failure force and failure stress increased and were highly linearly correlated with pull-out rate for reamed (R2 = 0.60 and 0.60), but not for unreamed (R2 = 0.00 and 0.00) specimens. The failure displacement and failure energy were relatively unchanged with pull-out rate, yielding low coefficients for unreamed (R2 = 0.25 and 0.00) and reamed (R2 = 0.27 and 0.00) groups. Unreamed versus reamed specimens were statistically different for failure force (p = 0.000) and stress (p = 0.000), but not for failure displacement (p = 0.297) and energy (0.054 < p < 1.000). This is the first study to perform an extensive investigation of the screw pull-out rate in unreamed and reamed synthetic long bone.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".