MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414474053 · doi:10.1002/jsp2.70116

A Comparison of Five Animal Models for Acute Intervertebral Disc Herniation Research

2025· article· en· W4414474053 on OpenAlex
Thomas A Slater, Beatrice Gagliostri, Matthew J. Kibble, Nazlı Tümer, Peter A. Cripton, Nicolas Newell

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJOR Spine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInnovate UK
KeywordsDisc herniationLumbar disc herniationIntervertebral discAnimal modelLumbarIntervertebral disk

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Study Design Microstructural investigation of mechanical load induced acute disc herniation on five animal models. Objective To compare how spinal discs in different animal models herniate under a standardized complex compressive load. Summary of Background Data Animal models in disc herniation research offer reduced degeneration‐associated variability, lower cost, and greater availability compared to human specimens. However, there is limited consensus regarding which species is best suited for modeling human herniation, making a comprehensive comparison of species‐specific herniation mechanisms necessary. Materials and Methods A standardized shear and compressive load, designed to herniate intervertebral discs, was applied to isolated discs of five cadaveric animal models ( n = 30, 6 specimens per group): bovine tail, bovine lumbar, ovine lumbar, porcine lumbar, and porcine cervical. The segments were flexed (7°), and a shear‐compressive load was applied at a crosshead displacement rate of 40 mm min −1 , until a force drop, or a displacement limit was reached (~80% of disc height). Microstructural analysis was undertaken to identify failure modes. Results Clinically relevant herniation features were observed in all models—including endplate and annulus fibrosus (AF) tearing, AF delamination, vertebral body (VB) fracture, nucleus pulposus (NP) extrusion into VB, and radial NP movement. Bovine lumbar, porcine cervical, and porcine lumbar segments exhibited high rates of radial NP movement (84%, 100%, and 67%, respectively), with ovine lumbar discs displaying VB fracture (84%) and NP extrusions into the VB (67%). Bovine tail discs showed minimal damage but were characterized by sequential lamellar AF tears (67%). Conclusions Porcine cervical, bovine lumbar, and porcine lumbar discs are suitable for annulus‐failure herniation research, although porcine cervical discs may be the most appropriate due to exhibiting the highest rate of relevant damages. Ovine lumbar discs are relevant for studying endplate junction failure herniations, and bovine tail discs are appropriate for implant‐related studies.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.384 · 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