MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4242646043 · doi:10.22215/etd/2014-10578

Non-invasive Assessment and Compensation of Soft-tissue Artefacts in Hip Joint Kinematics

2014· dissertation· en· W4242646043 on OpenAlexaff
Azadeh Rouhandeh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoft tissueJoint (building)Motion captureKinematicsCompensation (psychology)Biomedical engineeringComputer scienceMedicineOrthodonticsComputer visionMotion (physics)EngineeringSurgeryPhysicsStructural engineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate location of the hip joint centre is a necessary component in biomechanical human motion analysis to measure skeletal parameters and describe human motion.In human movement analysis, the hip joint centre can be estimated using functional methods based on the relative motion of the femur to pelvis using reflective markers attached to the skin surface through an optical motion capture system.Determination of the hip joint centre by functional methods suffers inaccuracy due to the soft tissue artefact; this is the relative motion between the markers and the underlying bone due to the muscle and skin deformation.Therefore, one of the main objectives in human movement analysis is the assessment and correction of this artefact.Various studies have described the movement of the soft tissue artefact and minimized it invasively.To solve this issue, we present a non-invasive method to assess and reduce the effect of the soft tissue artefact using optical motion capture data and tissue thickness from ultrasound measurements during flexion, extension, and abduction of the hip joint.Results show that the displacement of markers is non-linear and larger in areas closer to the hip joint.Also, the marker displacements are dependent on the movement type, being relatively larger in abduction movement.The quantification of soft tissue artefacts is used as a basis for a correction procedure for hip joint centre and minimizing the soft tissue artefact effects.Results show that our method for soft tissue artefact assessment and minimization reduces the error in the functional hip joint centre approximately from 13-23mm to 7-14 mm. 4.4Data Analysis .................

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHip disorders and treatments→French-language works237,207→