Tensile properties of human spinal dura mater and pericranium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autologous pericranium is a promising dural graft material. An optimal graft should exhibit similar mechanical properties to the native dura, but the mechanical properties of human pericranium have not been characterized, and studies of the biomechanical performance of human spinal dura are limited. The primary aim of this study was to measure the tensile structural and material properties of the pericranium, in the longitudinal and circumferential directions, and of the dura in each spinal region (cervical, thoracic and lumbar) and in three directions (longitudinal anterior and posterior, and circumferential). The secondary aim was to determine corresponding constitutive stress-strain equations using a one-term Ogden model. A total of 146 specimens were tested from 7 cadavers. Linear regression models assessed the effect of tissue type, region, and orientation on the structural and material properties. Pericranium was isotropic, while spinal dura was anisotropic with higher stiffness and strength in the longitudinal than the circumferential direction. Pericranium had lower strength and modulus than spinal dura across all regions in the longitudinal direction but was stronger and stiffer than dura in the circumferential direction. Spinal dura and pericranium had similar strain at peak force, toe, and yield, across all regions and directions. Human pericranium exhibits isotropic mechanical behavior that lies between that of the longitudinal and circumferential spinal dura. Further studies are required to determine if pericranium grafts behave like native dura under in vivo loading conditions. The Ogden parameters reported may be used for computational modeling of the central nervous system. Graphical abstract.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".