MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399616557 · doi:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2024.106631

Influence of test paradigm on loading dynamics during proximal femur fracture tests simulating sideways falls

2024· article· en· W4399616557 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel R. Martel, Jack P. Callaghan, Marina Mourtzakis, Thomas L. Willett, Andrew C. Laing

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials/Journal of mechanical behavior of biomedical materials · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip and Femur Fractures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationOntario Research Foundation
KeywordsFemurHip fractureFracture (geology)OrthodonticsFemur fractureDisplacement (psychology)Poison controlBiomechanicsMaterials scienceMedicineSurgeryOsteoporosisComposite materialAnatomyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fall-related hip fractures are a serious public health issue in older adults. As most mechanistic hip fracture risk prediction models incorporate tissue tolerance, test methods that can accurately characterize the fracture force of the femur (and factors that influence it) are imperative. While bone possesses viscoelastic properties, experimental characterization of rate-dependencies has been inconsistent in the whole-femur literature. The goal of this study was to investigate the influence of experimental paradigm on loading rate and fracture force (both means and variability) during mechanical tests simulating lateral fall loadings on the proximal femur. Six pairs of matched femurs were split randomly between two test paradigms: a ‘lower rate’ materials testing system (MTS) with a constant displacement rate of 60 mm/s, and a hip impact simulator (HIT) comprised of a custom-built vertical drop tower utilizing an impact velocity of 4 m/s. The loading rate was 88-fold higher for the HIT (mean (SD) = 2465.49 (807.38) kN/s) compared to the MTS (27.78 (10.03) kN/s) paradigm. However, no difference in fracture force was observed between test paradigms (mean (SD) = 4096.4 (1272.6) N for HIT, and 3641.3 (1285.8) N for MTS). Within-paradigm variability was not significantly different across paradigms for either loading rate or fracture force (coefficients of variation ranging from 0.311 to 0.361). Within each test paradigm, significant positive relationships were observed between loading rate and fracture force (HIT adjusted R2 = 0.833, p = 0.007; MTS adjusted R2 = 0.983, p < 0.0001). Overall, this study provides evidence that energy-based impact simulators can be a valid method to measure femoral bone strength in the context of fall-related hip fractures. This study motivates future research to characterize potential non-linear relationships between loading rate and fracture threshold at both macro and microscales.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials/Journal of mechanical behavior of biomedical materialsSame topicHip and Femur FracturesFrench-language works237,207