MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087923399 · doi:10.2147/mder.s260732

<p>The Mechanical Impedance of the Human Skull via Direct Bone Conduction Implants</p>

2020· article· en· W3087923399 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bo Håkansson, Fausto Woelflin, Anders Tjellström, William Hodgetts

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Devices Evidence and Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanical impedanceSkullMaterials scienceElectrical impedanceImplantBiomedical engineeringMedicineAnatomySurgeryElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The mechanical skull impedance is used in the design of direct bone drive hearing systems. This impedance is also important for the design of skull simulators used in manufacturing, service, and fitting procedures of such devices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The skull impedance was measured in 45 patients (25 female and 20 male) who were using percutaneous bone conduction implants (Ponto system or Baha system). Patients were recruited as a consecutive prospective case series and having an average age of 55.4 years (range 18-80 years). Seven patients were treated in Gothenburg, Sweden, and 38 patients in Edmonton, Canada. An impedance head (B&K 8001), driven by an excitation transducer with emphasized low-frequency response, was used to measure the mechanical point impedance with a swept sine from 100 to 10k Hz. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The skull impedance was found to have an anti-resonance of approximately 150 Hz, with a median maximum magnitude of 4500 mechanical ohms. Below this anti-resonance, the mechanical impedance was mainly mass-controlled corresponding to an effective skull mass of 2.5 kg at 100 Hz with substantial damping from neck and shoulder. Above the anti-resonance and up to 4 kHz, the impedance was stiffness-controlled, with a total compliance of approximately 450n m/N with a small amount of damping. At frequencies above 4 kHz, the skull impedance becomes gradually mass-controlled originating from the mass of the osseointegrated implant and adjacent bone. No significant differences related to gender or skull abnormalities were seen, just a slight dependence on age and major ear surgeries. The variability of the mechanical impedance among patients was not found to have any clinical importance. CONCLUSION: The mechanical skull impedance of percutaneous implants was found to confirm previous studies and can be used for optimizing the design and test procedures of direct bone drive hearing implants.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Devices Evidence and ResearchSame topicEar Surgery and Otitis MediaFrench-language works237,207