MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414302237 · doi:10.2196/73065

Essential Requirements and Relevant Technologies for Load-Bearing 3D-Printed Transtibial Prosthetic Sockets and Their Components: State-of-the-Art Review

2025· review· en· W4414302237 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Erika Dagge, Breda Clancy, Gavin Keane

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTechnicianWork (physics)Digital healthEmerging technologies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The manufacture of load-bearing prosthetic lower limb sockets is traditionally reliant on skilled technicians working with qualified clinicians to create bespoke solutions. While this approach is effective and, in some situations, necessary, the appeal of a sustainable, efficient, and digitalized production solution cannot be ignored. The focus of additive manufacturing (AM) is typically on low-weight-bearing prostheses, which can be misleading for clinics attempting to adopt AM solutions for clientele with weight-bearing or activity-level needs. Objective: This review aims to offer readers a way to approach AM for load-bearing requirements as opposed to non-load-bearing counterparts. The use cases of AM for the production of load-bearing transtibial prosthetic sockets and components are reviewed to highlight current trends, protocols, and standings. Methods: By reviewing publications from the past 25 years, this state-of-the-art review highlights the key requirements and technologies relevant for load-bearing transtibial prosthetic sockets specifically. Results: The most commonly used AM solutions for commercial use, such as selective laser sintering and binder jetting through Multi Jet Fusion, are outlined. As these solutions are most often paired with the structural testing standard International Organization for Standardization 10328, their relevance for evaluating the strength and durability of lower limb sockets is also discussed. Clinician and technician experiences of digitalized ways of working within the prosthetic industry for load-bearing applications are outlined. Conclusions: Observations of adoption barriers of AM solutions are brought to light, focusing on clinician and technician education, skill set, exposure to innovative technologies, and trust in the regulation of digital processes in a clinical and technical environment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive TechnologiesSame topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207