MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4395675752 · doi:10.2196/57329

Quantifying Bone and Skin Movement in the Residual Limb-Socket Interface of Individuals With Transtibial Limb Loss Using Dynamic Stereo X-Ray: Protocol for a Lower Limb Loss Cadaver and Clinical Study

2024· article· en· W4395675752 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jason Maikos, John M Chomack, David Herlihy, David N. Paglia, Charlene Wetterstrand, J. Patrick O’Connor, Michael J Hyre, J Peter Loan, Susan E. D’Andrea

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRehabilitation Research and Development ServiceU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsKinematicsCadaverGaitResidualComputer scienceBiomechanicsBiomedical engineeringTibiaMedicineOrthodonticsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnatomyPhysicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Relative motion between the residual limb and socket in individuals with transtibial limb loss can lead to substantial consequences that limit mobility. Although assessments of the relative motion between the residual limb and socket have been performed, there remains a substantial gap in understanding the complex mechanics of the residual limb-socket interface during dynamic activities that limits the ability to improve socket design. However, dynamic stereo x-ray (DSX) is an advanced imaging technology that can quantify 3D bone movement and skin deformation inside a socket during dynamic activities. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop analytical tools using DSX to quantify the dynamic, in vivo kinematics between the residual limb and socket and the mechanism of residual tissue deformation. METHODS: A lower limb cadaver study will first be performed to optimize the placement of an array of radiopaque beads and markers on the socket, liner, and skin to simultaneously assess dynamic tibial movement and residual tissue and liner deformation. Five cadaver limbs will be used in an iterative process to develop an optimal marker setup. Stance phase gait will be simulated during each session to induce bone movement and skin and liner deformation. The number, shape, size, and placement of each marker will be evaluated after each session to refine the marker set. Once an optimal marker setup is identified, 21 participants with transtibial limb loss will be fitted with a socket capable of being suspended via both elevated vacuum and traditional suction. Participants will undergo a 4-week acclimation period and then be tested in the DSX system to track tibial, skin, and liner motion under both suspension techniques during 3 activities: treadmill walking at a self-selected speed, at a walking speed 10% faster, and during a step-down movement. The performance of the 2 suspension techniques will be evaluated by quantifying the 3D bone movement of the residual tibia with respect to the socket and quantifying liner and skin deformation at the socket-residuum interface. RESULTS: This study was funded in October 2021. Cadaver testing began in January 2023. Enrollment began in February 2024. Data collection is expected to conclude in December 2025. The initial dissemination of results is expected in November 2026. CONCLUSIONS: The successful completion of this study will help develop analytical methods for the accurate assessment of residual limb-socket motion. The results will significantly advance the understanding of the complex biomechanical interactions between the residual limb and the socket, which can aid in evidence-based clinical practice and socket prescription guidelines. This critical foundational information can aid in the development of future socket technology that has the potential to reduce secondary comorbidities that result from complications of poor prosthesis load transmission. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/57329.

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)0.005
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.260
GPT teacher head0.601
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques→French-language works237,207→