ArticleAmerican journal of physical anthropology2018
Predicting the bending properties of long bones: Insights from an experimental mouse model.
Article in American journal of physical anthropology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAnalyses of bone cross-sectional geometry are frequently used by anthropologists and paleontologists to infer the loading histories of past populations. To address some underlying assumptions, we investigated the relative roles of genetics and exercise on bone cross-sectional geometry and bending mechanics in three mouse strains: high bone density (C3H/He), low bone density (C57BL/6), and a high-runner strain homozygous for the Myh4 METHODS AND MATERIALS: Weanlings of each strain were divided into exercise (wheel) or control (sedentary) treatment groups for a 7-week experimental period. Morphometrics of the femoral mid-diaphysis and mechanical testing were used to assess both theoretical and ex vivo bending mechanics.
resultsAcross all measured morphological and bending traits, we found relatively small effects of exercise treatment compared to larger and more frequent interstrain differences. In the exercised group, total distance run over the experimental period was not a predictor of any morphological or bending traits. Cross-sectional geometry did not accurately predict bone response to loading. DISCUSSION: Results from this experimental model do not support hypothesized associations among extreme exercise, cross-sectional geometry, and bending mechanics. Our results suggest that analysis of cross-sectional geometry alone is insufficient to predict loading response, and questions the common assumption that cross-sectional geometry differences are indicative of differential loading history.
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.