MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165176312 · doi:10.1001/archfacial.2011.1533

Biomechanical Properties of the Facial Retaining Ligaments

2012· article· en· W2165176312 on OpenAlexaff
Michael G. Brandt, Agnieszka Hassa, Kathryn Roth, Bret Wehrli, Corey C. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Facial Plastic Surgery · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadaveric spasmCadaverMedicineLigamentAnatomyPeriodontal fiberBiomechanicsOrthodontics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Osteocutaneous facial retaining ligaments play an important role in the aging face. We sought to better characterize the biophysical properties of these ligaments and, in doing so, provide an empirical basis for the natural descent seen in facial aging. METHODS: Five fresh frozen cadaver heads yielding 10 hemifaces were dissected to expose the orbital, zygomatic, buccomaxillary, and mandibular osteocutaneous ligaments. Each ligament was assessed and subjected to biomechanical testing. The main outcome measures included ligament dimensions, stiffness, percentage of elongation, and force to initial and ultimate failure. RESULTS: Initial and ultimate failure testing revealed the zygomatic ligament to be strongest, followed by the orbital, mandibular, and maxillary ligaments. The zygomatic ligament was also stiffest, followed by the orbital, maxillary, and mandibular ligaments. The percentage of elongation acted as a surrogate marker of elasticity, with the greatest elasticity maintained by the mandibular ligament, followed by the orbital, zygomatic, and buccomaxillary ligaments. Ligament dimensions and biophysical properties did not vary relative to cadaveric hemiface, age, or sex. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first investigation to quantify the biomechanical properties of the facial retaining ligaments. Inherent ligament properties seem to be related to the changes observed in facial aging, although further study is required.

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)0.004
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations51
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Facial Plastic SurgerySame topicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207