THE EFFECTS OF INTRA-ABDOMINAL PRESSURE ON THE STABILITY AND UNLOADING OF THE SPINE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In spite of earlier experimental and modeling studies, the relative role of the intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) in spine mechanics has remained controversial. This study employs simple analytical and finite element (FE) models of the spine and its surrounding structures to investigate the contribution of IAP to spinal loading and stability. The analytical model includes the abdominal cavity surrounded by muscles, lumbar spine, rib cage and pelvic ring. The intra-abdominal cavity and its surrounding muscles are represented by a thin deformable cylindrical membrane. Muscle activation levels are simulated by changing the Young's modulus of the membrane in the direction of muscle fibers, yielding IAP values recorded under the partial Valsalva maneuver. In the FE model, the abdominal cavity is cylindrical and filled with a nearly incompressible fluid. The surrounding muscles are modeled as membrane elements with transverse isotropic material properties simulating their fiber orientation. Results indicate a good qualitative agreement between the analytical and FE models. Larger external force and/or higher levels of muscle activation generate higher IAP thereby increasing spinal stiffness. These effects are more pronounced for activation of muscles with more horizontally directed fibers, e.g., transverse abdominis (TA). The capacity of the abdominal muscles to indirectly unload and stabilize the spine by generating IAP depends mostly on their fiber orientation, and secondarily on their cross-section area.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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".