Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17558646›Full record

ReviewComputer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering2007

Verification, validation and sensitivity studies in computational biomechanics.

Andrew E Anderson, Benjamin J Ellis, Jeffrey A Weiss

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

71 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Finite element analysis of the rotator cuff: A systematic review.Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon) · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Rapid personalized computational modeling of the wrist.Medical engineering & physics · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A computational framework to optimize the mechanical behavior of synthetic vascular grafts.Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials · 2025
    Article
  10. Validating subject-specific knee models fromFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A systematic comparison between FEBio and PolyFEM for biomechanical systems.Computer methods and programs in biomedicine · 2024
    Article
  16. Soft tissue material properties based on human abdominalFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Article
  17. Modeling fatigue failure in soft tissue using a visco-hyperelastic model with discontinuous damage.Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Assessment of reporting practices and reproducibility potential of a cohort of published studies in computational knee biomechanics.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2023
    Article
  20. Article

11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Andrew E AndersonDepartment of Bioengineering, Scientific Computing and Imaging Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Benjamin J Ellis
Jeffrey A Weiss

Funding

Finite Elements For Biomechanics And BiophysicsR01GM083925 · NIGMS · UTAH STATE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM--UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI GERARD A. ATESHIAN, JEFFREY A. WEISS · 2008 to 2026
$7.6M
Angiogenesis and the Extracellular MatrixR01HL077683 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI WEISS, JEFFREY A. · 2004 to 2011
$3.8M
Origins of Elasticity/Viscoelasticity in Knee LigamentsR01AR047369 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI WEISS, JEFFREY A. · 2000 to 2014
$3.4M
Biomechanics of the Dysplastic HipR01AR053344 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI WEISS, JEFFREY A. · 2007 to 2011
$1.3M
GLENOHUMERAL JOINT STABILITY: ROLE OF THE CAPSULER01AR050218 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI DEBSKI, RICHARD E · 2004 to 2007
$965k
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL077683NHLBI NIH HHS R01-HL077683NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR047369NIAMS NIH HHS R01-AR047369NIAMS NIH HHS R01-AR050218NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR053344NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM083925
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computational techniques and software for the analysis of problems in mechanics have naturally moved from their origins in the traditional engineering disciplines to the study of cell, tissue and organ biomechanics. Increasingly complex models have been developed to describe and predict the mechanical behavior of such biological systems. While the availability of advanced computational tools has led to exciting research advances in the field, the utility of these models is often the subject of criticism due to inadequate model verification and validation (V&V). The objective of this review is to present the concepts of verification, validation and sensitivity studies with regard to the construction, analysis and interpretation of models in computational biomechanics. Specific examples from the field are discussed. It is hoped that this review will serve as a guide to the use of V&V principles in the field of computational biomechanics, thereby improving the peer acceptance of studies that use computational modeling techniques.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationModels, BiologicalSoftwareSoftware ValidationComputational BiologyReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID17558646
PMCPMC3361760

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.