MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395024760 · doi:10.1115/1.4065362

Injury Risk Functions for the Midsized Male Wrist and Elbow as a Result of Behind Shield Blunt Trauma

2024· article· en· W4395024760 on OpenAlexaff
Julia E. de Lange, Lisette Burrows, Cheryl E. Quenneville

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElbowBluntMedicineWristBlunt traumaShieldSurgeryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ballistic shields protect users from a variety of threats, including projectiles. Shield back-face deformation (BFD) is the result of the shield deflecting or absorbing a projectile and deforming toward the user. Back-face deformation can result in localized blunt loading to the upper extremity, where the shield is supported by the user. Two vulnerable locations along the upper extremity were investigated-the wrist and elbow-on eight postmortem human subjects (PMHS) using a pneumatic impacting apparatus for investigating the fracture threshold as a result of behind shield blunt trauma (BSBT). Impacting parameters were established by subjecting an augmented WorldSID anthropomorphic test device (ATD) positioned behind a ballistic shield to ballistic impacts. These data were used to form the impact parameters applied to PMHS, where the wrist most frequently fractured at the distal radius and the elbow most frequently fractured at the radial head. The fracture threshold for the wrist was 5663±1386 N (mean±standard deviation), higher than the elbow at 4765±894 N (though not significantly, p = 0.15). The failure impact velocity for wrist impacts was 17.7±2.1 m/s, while for the elbow, the failure impact velocity was 19.5±0.9 m/s. An approximate 10% risk of fracture threshold was identified on the modified WorldSID ATD (no flesh analogue included) to inform future protective standards.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biomechanical EngineeringSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207