ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2014
Effects of densitometry, material mapping and load estimation uncertainties on the accuracy of patient-specific finite-element models of the scapula.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Finite element models of the human shoulder complex: a review of their clinical implications and modelling techniques.International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering · 2017Review
- Quantitative Computed Tomography (QCT) derived Bone Mineral Density (BMD) in finite element studies: a review of the literature.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2016Review
- Cloud-Based Automated Design and Additive Manufacturing: A Usage Data-Enabled Paradigm Shift.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-specific biomechanical models including patient-specific finite-element (FE) models are considered potentially important tools for providing personalized healthcare to patients with musculoskeletal diseases. A multi-step procedure is often needed to generate a patient-specific FE model. As all involved steps are associated with certain levels of uncertainty, it is important to study how the uncertainties of individual components propagate to final simulation results. In this study, we considered a specific case of this problem where the uncertainties of the involved steps were known and the aim was to determine the uncertainty of the predicted strain distribution. The effects of uncertainties of three important components of patient-specific models, including bone density, musculoskeletal loads and the parameters of the material mapping relationship on the predicted strain distributions, were studied. It was found that the number of uncertain components and the level of their uncertainty determine the uncertainty of simulation results. The 'average' uncertainty values were found to be relatively small even for high levels of uncertainty in the components of the model. The 'maximum' uncertainty values were, however, quite high and occurred in the areas of the scapula that are of the greatest clinical relevance. In addition, the uncertainty of the simulation result was found to be dependent on the type of movement analysed, with abduction movements presenting consistently lower uncertainty values than flexion movements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.