MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909617937 · doi:10.1177/1754337118822940

A three-dimensional finite element model of a 6-year-old child for simulating brain response from physical reconstructions of head impacts

2019· article· en· W2909617937 on OpenAlexafffund
David Koncan, Michael D. Gilchrist, Michael Vassilyadi, T. Blaine Hoshizaki

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part P Journal of Sports Engineering and Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment
KeywordsConcussionFinite element methodKinematicsCadaveric spasmPopulationHead (geology)Poison controlHead injuryBiomechanicsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationComputer sciencePsychologySimulationInjury preventionMedicineEngineeringStructural engineeringPhysicsGeologySurgeryAnatomyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite young children being a high-risk population for sustaining concussive injuries in sport, few studies have investigated head impact biomechanics from sporting impacts using physical models and finite element models of the brain. Physical reconstructions are often used in concussive research, using the recorded kinematics to load finite element models of the brain to obtain better information of real-life head injuries. For children, scaling adult models is a common method used to study the youth population. However, this method does not capture age-dependent material properties or the unique geometry of the developing brain. To address these deficiencies, a novel three-dimensional finite element model of a 6-year-old child was developed and compared to a scaled adult model, for use with physical reconstructions. With the lack of intracranial validation data for the youth population, adult cadaveric data for brain motion was used for comparison. The new brain model showed unique responses in motion and strain compared to the scaled adult model. Using the normalized integral square error method, the new model was classified to have ‘fair’ to ‘excellent’ biofidelity. The new model is proposed as more appropriate for conducting concussion and brain injury research in young children near 6 years of age.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part P Journal of Sports Engineering and TechnologySame topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207