MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411100572 · doi:10.3389/fbioe.2025.1582438

Dynamic behavior of the nucleus pulposus within the intervertebral disc loading: a systematic review and meta-analysis exploring the concept of dynamic disc model

2025· review· en· W4411100572 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-Philippe Deneuville, Maxime Billot, Alexandra Cervantes, Sylvain Peterlongo, Martin Meyer, Mezika Kolder, Mathilde Bourgeois, Adrien Pallot, Manuel Roulaud, Amine Ounajim, Mark Laslett, Mathieu Sarracanie, Najat Salameh, Arnaud Germaneau, Philippe Rigoard

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsFrancophone University Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervertebral discNucleusMedicineAnatomyNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The dynamic disc model (DDM) is a theoretical framework in spine mechanics that theorizes the behavior of the nucleus pulposus within the intervertebral disc under various loads. The model predicts displacement of the nucleus pulposus away from the bending loads, for example backward displacement of the nucleus pulposus with a flexion load. These predictions are regularly used as a theoretical basis for explaining certain disc pathologies, such as disc herniation. Methods We screened seven databases (CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and HAL) up to July 2024, identifying studies through a PRISMA-guided approach that detailed the mechanical transformation (displacement and deformation) of the nucleus pulposus under bending load on the intervertebral disc. We conducted a double-blind data extraction and quality assessment of the body of evidence. Finally, we performed a meta-analysis of proportions. Results From the 9,269 articles screened, 14 studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) was employed in 92.8% of the studies, revealing four strategies for assessing nucleus pulposus transformation. The meta-analysis of asymptomatic subjects’ data demonstrated that the nucleus pulposus behavior aligned with dynamic disc model predictions in 85.4% (95% CI = [79.4–91.4]) across spinal regions and bending directions. However, significant heterogeneity and low study quality were noted. Only one study used discography to assess the DDM in a discogenic pain population, identifying discrepancies in nucleus pulposus transformation and contrast agent leakage. Conclusion Evidence for the dynamic disc model for intact discs is of low strength, whereas very limited evidence challenges the dynamic disc model for fissured discs. New multiparametric MRI studies may help guiding future clinical assessment protocols. Systematic Review Registration CRD42022331774.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.141

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.023
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Bioengineering and BiotechnologySame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207