ArticlePloS one2016
On the Use of Bone Remodelling Models to Estimate the Density Distribution of Bones. Uniqueness of the Solution.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Computational Multiscale Framework for Bone Remodeling: Coupling Apparent Density Evolution and Microscale Shape Optimization.International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Computational Analysis of the Influence of Menopause and Ageing on Bone Mineral Density, Exploring the Impact of Bone Turnover and Focal Bone Balance-A Study on Overload and Underload Scenarios.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Mechanoregulated trabecular bone adaptation: Progress report onBiomaterials and biosystems · 2022Review
- A coupled computational framework for bone fracture healing and long-term remodelling: Investigating the role of internal fixation on bone fractures.International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering · 2022Article
- Finite element analysis of bone remodelling with piezoelectric effects using an open-source framework.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2021Article
- Computational Analysis of Bone Remodeling in the Proximal Tibia Under Electrical Stimulation Considering the Piezoelectric Properties.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Numerical Simulation of Mandible Bone Remodeling under Tooth Loading: A Parametric Study.Scientific reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone remodelling models are widely used in a phenomenological manner to estimate numerically the distribution of apparent density in bones from the loads they are daily subjected to. These simulations start from an arbitrary initial distribution, usually homogeneous, and the density changes locally until a bone remodelling equilibrium is achieved. The bone response to mechanical stimulus is traditionally formulated with a mathematical relation that considers the existence of a range of stimulus, called dead or lazy zone, for which no net bone mass change occurs. Implementing a relation like that leads to different solutions depending on the starting density. The non-uniqueness of the solution has been shown in this paper using two different bone remodelling models: one isotropic and another anisotropic. It has also been shown that the problem of non-uniqueness is only mitigated by removing the dead zone, but it is not completely solved unless the bone formation and bone resorption rates are limited to certain maximum values.
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.