MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391840158 · doi:10.2196/48146

Finite Element Analysis for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Scoping Review of the Current Findings and Design Approaches, Including Recommendations on the Choice of Material Properties

2024· article· en· W4391840158 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Biomedical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRosetrees TrustDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMyelopathyMedicineFinite element methodPhysical medicine and rehabilitationCurrent (fluid)Physical therapyMedical physicsEngineeringStructural engineeringPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a slow-motion spinal cord injury caused via chronic mechanical loading by spinal degenerative changes. A range of different degenerative changes can occur. Finite element analysis (FEA) can predict the distribution of mechanical stress and strain on the spinal cord to help understand the implications of any mechanical loading. One of the critical assumptions for FEA is the behavior of each anatomical element under loading (ie, its material properties). OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to undertake a structured process to select the most appropriate material properties for use in DCM FEA. In doing so, it also provides an overview of existing modeling approaches in spinal cord disease and clinical insights into DCM. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review using qualitative synthesis. Observational studies that discussed the use of FEA models involving the spinal cord in either health or disease (including DCM) were eligible for inclusion in the review. We followed the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched to September 1, 2021. This was supplemented with citation searching to retrieve the literature used to define material properties. Duplicate title and abstract screening and data extraction were performed. The quality of evidence was appraised using the quality assessment tool we developed, adapted from the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and shortlisted with respect to DCM material properties, with a final recommendation provided. A qualitative synthesis of the literature is presented according to the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis reporting guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 60 papers were included: 41 (68%) "FEA articles" and 19 (32%) "source articles." Most FEA articles (33/41, 80%) modeled the gray matter and white matter separately, with models typically based on tabulated data or, less frequently, a hyperelastic Ogden variant or linear elastic function. Of the 19 source articles, 14 (74%) were identified as describing the material properties of the spinal cord, of which 3 (21%) were considered most relevant to DCM. Of the 41 FEA articles, 15 (37%) focused on DCM, of which 9 (60%) focused on ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. Our aggregated results of DCM FEA indicate that spinal cord loading is influenced by the pattern of degenerative changes, with decompression alone (eg, laminectomy) sufficient to address this as opposed to decompression combined with other procedures (eg, laminectomy and fusion). CONCLUSIONS: FEA is a promising technique for exploring the pathobiology of DCM and informing clinical care. This review describes a structured approach to help future investigators deploy FEA for DCM. However, there are limitations to these recommendations and wider uncertainties. It is likely that these will need to be overcome to support the clinical translation of FEA to DCM.

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.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.215 · 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