MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101874405 · doi:10.2174/1874120701004010162

FEM Simulation of Non-Progressive Growth from Asymmetric Loading and Vicious Cycle Theory: Scoliosis Study Proof of Concept

2010· article· en· W2101874405 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Fok, Samer Adeeb, Jason P. Carey

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open Biomedical Engineering Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScoliosisBiomechanicsVertebraVirtuous circle and vicious circleFinite element methodIdiopathic scoliosisOrthodonticsComputer sciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineStructural engineeringAnatomyEngineeringSurgeryEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scoliosis affects about 1-3% of the adolescent population, with 80% of cases being idiopathic. There is currently a lack of understanding regarding the biomechanics of scoliosis, current treatment methods can be further improved with a greater understanding of scoliosis growth patterns. The objective of this study is to develop a finite element model that can respond to loads in a similar fashion as current spine biomechanics models and apply it to scoliosis growth. Using CT images of a non-scoliotic individual, a finite element model of the L3-L4 vertebra was created. By applying asymmetric loading in accordance to the 'vicious cycle' theory and through the use of a growth modulation equation it is possible to determine the amount of growth each region of the vertebra will undergo; therefore predict scoliosis growth over a period of time. This study seeks to demonstrate how improved anatomy can expand researchers current knowledge of scoliosis.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open Biomedical Engineering JournalSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207